- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT03202888
Family Input for Quality and Safety (FIQS)
October 24, 2018 updated by: University of California, San Francisco
Novel IT to Create Patient-Integrated Hospital Quality Improvement and Improve Patient Safety
This project aims to create and evaluate a tool that gathers patient and family member feedback and makes it rapidly available to providers, enabling nimble and responsive safety and quality improvement efforts.
Aim 1. Determine feasibility and acceptability of the patient data collection and provider dashboard tool.
The investigators will conduct usability testing prior to study start, measure user (patients and providers) engagement over time, and gather feedback about the tool at study end.
This will test the hypothesis that patient and caregiver characteristics will predict tool use.
Aim 2. Assess whether reporting patient- and caregiver- observed processes of care to providers leads to changes over time.
The investigators hypothesize that performance on structured items of interest will improve over time with rapidly available data presented to providers.
Aim 3. Estimate tool implementation effect sizes, using a pre-post design, on medical errors.
Study Overview
Detailed Description
More than a decade after the seminal Institute Of Medicine report, "To Err is Human", failure rates in patient safety remain stubbornly high in hospitals.
Prior efforts to improve hospital quality have had relatively little impact, in part due to limited access to timely quality improvement data.
The long-term goal of this application is to leverage existing technologies to give voice to hospitalized patients and their family members, leading to improvements in hospital safety and quality.
The overall objective in this application is to create and evaluate a tool that gathers patient and family member feedback and makes it rapidly available to providers, enabling nimble and responsive safety and quality improvement efforts.
The central hypothesis, based on the theory of co-production, is that observations from patients and families, gathered in a structured way, will provide actionable information regarding patient safety and quality.
The rationale for doing this project is to test an innovative new approach to creating a rapidly available data stream to providers who are working on specific improvement efforts, and a mechanism for creating a quality improvement approach that is inherently patient-centered.
The investigators plan to test the central hypothesis and thereby accomplish the objective of this application by focusing on the following areas of research for Health IT: Use, Implementation, and Impact on Outcomes, under the study type "Pilot and feasibility", pursuing three specific aims: Aim 1. Determine feasibility and acceptability of the patient data collection and provider dashboard tool (Use and Implementation).
The investigators will conduct usability testing prior to study start, measure user (patients and providers) engagement over time, and gather feedback about the tool at study end.
The investigators hypothesize that patient and caregiver characteristics will predict tool use.
Aim 2. Assess whether reporting patient- and caregiver- observed processes of care to providers leads to changes over time (Implementation).
The investigators hypothesize that performance on structured items of interest will improve over time with rapidly available data presented to providers.
Aim 3. Estimate tool implementation effect sizes, using a pre-post design, on medical errors (Impact on outcomes).
The proposed research is innovative, in the investigators' opinion, based on a paradigm-shifting conceptual model of patient-engaged quality improvement, and because it leverages technology to gather and present data in an unprecedented manner.
The expected contribution of the proposed research will be an adapted tool that will gather meaningful and important data on patient safety and present it in an actionable way to providers and hospital leaders, resulting in a powerful data stream to fuel rapid improvements in patient safety.
Pilot data from this proposal will inform the design of a future cluster-randomized trial of the new tool across multiple hospital systems.
This contribution will be significant because it represents key steps towards a new approach to improving patient safety in the hospital.
Study Type
Interventional
Enrollment (Actual)
435
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.
Study Locations
-
-
California
-
San Francisco, California, United States, 94158
- UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital
-
-
Participation Criteria
Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Child
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Yes
Genders Eligible for Study
All
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Patient and caregiver participants will be recruited from admitted patients and their family members on the medical-surgical units at UCSF's Benioff Children's Hospital during the study period.
- Eligible providers will be the participating hospitalists during the study period.
All nurse managers on the units and the patient safety and quality managers for the units will be eligible. All nurses will be eligible on the participating units.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patients who are youth in the foster care system will not be eligible.
- Patients or parents/guardians who do not have smart phones will not be eligible.
There are no provider or nurse or quality manager exclusions.
Study Plan
This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
- Allocation: N/A
- Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
---|---|
Experimental: Intervention
After completing enrollment surveys, including measures of patient activation and medical knowledge, participants will be invited to use the novel IT.
The technology is a mobile responsive website for survey data collection made by our technology vendor, QuesGen.
Patients and family members will be able to access the website from any personal device with internet access: laptop, tablet, or smart phone.
QuesGen will send a text message reminder to participants with a link to specific questionnaires at scheduled time intervals.
Frequency of text messaging will likely be daily, but will ultimately reflect family and patient feedback in Aim 1.
In addition to text reminders, participants will be able to answer questionnaires at-will by accessing the mobile responsive website.
|
QuesGen-created mobile responsive website tool, Family Input for Quality and Safety.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
Change in rate of preventable medical errors or adverse events per 100 admissions
Time Frame: Measured cross-sectionally in the hospital unit at baseline for three months, and again for three months at the end of the intervention (months 10,11,12 of the intervention).
|
This is a hospital unit-level outcome measure, assessing unit-level rate of adverse events and preventable medical errors in a time period before the intervention, and the unit-level rate at the end of the intervention.
The investigators will apply standard definitions of medical errors as preventable failures in processes of care and adverse events as preventable and non-preventable unintended consequences of medical care that lead to patient harm.
This is a composite measure and will be measured as total count of medical errors plus total count of adverse events per 100 admissions.
The investigators will not track this measure across the same group of patients in the before and after periods.
Participants will be included for the duration of their admission, which may vary.
The rate will be measured cross-sectionally in both time periods.
|
Measured cross-sectionally in the hospital unit at baseline for three months, and again for three months at the end of the intervention (months 10,11,12 of the intervention).
|
Collaborators and Investigators
This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Naomi Bardach, MD, MAS, University of California, San Francisco
Publications and helpful links
The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.
General Publications
- James JT. A new, evidence-based estimate of patient harms associated with hospital care. J Patient Saf. 2013 Sep;9(3):122-8. doi: 10.1097/PTS.0b013e3182948a69.
- Classen DC, Resar R, Griffin F, Federico F, Frankel T, Kimmel N, Whittington JC, Frankel A, Seger A, James BC. 'Global trigger tool' shows that adverse events in hospitals may be ten times greater than previously measured. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011 Apr;30(4):581-9. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0190. Erratum In: Health Aff (Millwood). 2011 Jun;30(6):1217.
- Shekelle PG, Pronovost PJ, Wachter RM, Taylor SL, Dy SM, Foy R, Hempel S, McDonald KM, Ovretveit J, Rubenstein LV, Adams AS, Angood PB, Bates DW, Bickman L, Carayon P, Donaldson L, Duan N, Farley DO, Greenhalgh T, Haughom J, Lake ET, Lilford R, Lohr KN, Meyer GS, Miller MR, Neuhauser DV, Ryan G, Saint S, Shojania KG, Shortell SM, Stevens DP, Walshe K. Advancing the science of patient safety. Ann Intern Med. 2011 May 17;154(10):693-6. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-154-10-201105170-00011.
- Landrigan CP, Parry GJ, Bones CB, Hackbarth AD, Goldmann DA, Sharek PJ. Temporal trends in rates of patient harm resulting from medical care. N Engl J Med. 2010 Nov 25;363(22):2124-34. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa1004404. Erratum In: N Engl J Med. 2010 Dec 23;363(26):2573.
- Chassin MR. Improving the quality of health care: what's taking so long? Health Aff (Millwood). 2013 Oct;32(10):1761-5. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2013.0809.
- Erasmus V, Daha TJ, Brug H, Richardus JH, Behrendt MD, Vos MC, van Beeck EF. Systematic review of studies on compliance with hand hygiene guidelines in hospital care. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2010 Mar;31(3):283-94. doi: 10.1086/650451.
- Conway PH, Mostashari F, Clancy C. The future of quality measurement for improvement and accountability. JAMA. 2013 Jun 5;309(21):2215-6. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.4929. No abstract available.
- Blumenthal D, McGinnis JM. Measuring Vital Signs: an IOM report on core metrics for health and health care progress. JAMA. 2015 May 19;313(19):1901-2. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.4862. No abstract available.
- Rossi P, Lipsey M, Freeman H. Evaluation: A Systematic Approach. 7th Edition ed: SAGE Publications, Inc; 2003.
- Bardach NS, Asteria-Penaloza R, Boscardin WJ, Dudley RA. The relationship between commercial website ratings and traditional hospital performance measures in the USA. BMJ Qual Saf. 2013 Mar;22(3):194-202. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001360. Epub 2012 Nov 23.
- Greaves F, Pape UJ, King D, Darzi A, Majeed A, Wachter RM, Millett C. Associations between Web-based patient ratings and objective measures of hospital quality. Arch Intern Med. 2012 Mar 12;172(5):435-6. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2011.1675. Epub 2012 Feb 13. No abstract available.
- Greaves F, Pape UJ, King D, Darzi A, Majeed A, Wachter RM, Millett C. Associations between Internet-based patient ratings and conventional surveys of patient experience in the English NHS: an observational study. BMJ Qual Saf. 2012 Jul;21(7):600-5. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2012-000906. Epub 2012 Apr 20.
- Han E, Hudson Scholle S, Morton S, Bechtel C, Kessler R. Survey shows that fewer than a third of patient-centered medical home practices engage patients in quality improvement. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013 Feb;32(2):368-75. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2012.1183.
- Clancy CM. Patient Safety: One Decade after To Err Is Human. 2009; http://www.psqh.com/septemberoctober-2009/234-september-october-2009-ahrq.html. Accessed October 29, 2013.
- Guide to Patient and Family Engagement: Environmental Scan Report. October 2014; http://www.ahrq.gov/research/findings/final-reports/ptfamilyscan/ptfamilysum.html. Accessed June 10, 2015.
Study record dates
These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
June 26, 2017
Primary Completion (Actual)
April 27, 2018
Study Completion (Actual)
April 27, 2018
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
June 20, 2017
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
June 27, 2017
First Posted (Actual)
June 29, 2017
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
October 26, 2018
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
October 24, 2018
Last Verified
October 1, 2018
More Information
Terms related to this study
Other Study ID Numbers
- FIQS
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
NO
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
No
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Patient Safety
-
Radboud University Medical CenterZonMw: The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and DevelopmentTerminatedPatient Empowerment | Patient Safety | Medication SafetyNetherlands
-
Anne Estrup OlesenAalborg University; University College of Northern Denmark; Aalborg KommuneRecruitingPatient Safety | Medication SafetyDenmark
-
VA Office of Research and DevelopmentUniversity of California, San FranciscoNot yet recruiting
-
University Health Network, TorontoSunnybrook Health Sciences Centre; Sinai Health SystemCompleted
-
Johannes Gutenberg University MainzCompleted
-
Fundació d'investigació Sanitària de les Illes...Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad, SpainUnknown
-
Ottawa Hospital Research InstituteCompleted
-
Charite University, Berlin, GermanyCompleted
-
Fundació d'investigació Sanitària de les Illes...Andalusian School of Public Health; Fundación Avedis Donabedian; IDIAP JORDI GOL and other collaboratorsNot yet recruiting
-
NHS Education for ScotlandRecruitingPatient SafetyUnited Kingdom
Clinical Trials on Intervention
-
Biolux Research Holdings, Inc.TerminatedOrthodontic Tooth MovementCanada
-
University of California, San FranciscoNational Cancer Institute (NCI)CompletedColorectal Carcinoma | Healthy Subject | Health Status UnknownUnited States
-
University of FloridaCompletedSensitivityUnited States
-
Roswell Park Cancer InstituteNational Cancer Institute (NCI); National Institute on Minority Health and...RecruitingHuman Papillomavirus InfectionUnited States
-
Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer CenterCompleted
-
Mayo ClinicNational Cancer Institute (NCI)WithdrawnCancer Survivor | Peripheral Sensory Neuropathy
-
Nottingham Trent UniversityUnknownOverweight and ObesityUnited Kingdom
-
OHSU Knight Cancer InstituteOregon Health and Science UniversityRecruitingAnatomic Stage I Breast Cancer AJCC v8 | Anatomic Stage IA Breast Cancer AJCC v8 | Anatomic Stage IB Breast Cancer AJCC v8 | Anatomic Stage II Breast Cancer AJCC v8 | Anatomic Stage IIA Breast Cancer AJCC v8 | Anatomic Stage IIB Breast Cancer AJCC v8 | Anatomic Stage IIIA Breast Cancer AJCC v8 | Prognostic... and other conditionsUnited States
-
Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center at Thomas Jefferson...American Cancer Society, Inc.Completed
-
Vanderbilt UniversityAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)Completed