Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2020 Apr;29(7-8):1267-1275.
doi: 10.1111/jocn.15184. Epub 2020 Jan 30.

The introduction of a safety checklist in two UK hospital emergency departments: A qualitative study of implementation and staff use

Affiliations
Multicenter Study

The introduction of a safety checklist in two UK hospital emergency departments: A qualitative study of implementation and staff use

Tracey Stone et al. J Clin Nurs. 2020 Apr.

Abstract

Aims and objectives: To explore the extent to which a checklist designed to support patient safety in hospital Emergency Departments was recognised and used by staff.

Background: Patient crowding in UK Emergency Departments makes it difficult for staff to monitor all patients for signs of clinical deterioration. An Emergency Department Safety Checklist was developed at a UK hospital to ensure patients are regularly monitored. It was subsequently implemented in six hospitals and recommended for use across the National Health Service in England.

Methods: This was a qualitative study in two UK hospital Emergency Departments. Data collection consisted of sixty-six hours of nonparticipant observation and interviews with twenty-six staff. Observations were sampled across different days and times. Interviews sampled a range of staff. Data were analysed thematically. The study was undertaken in accordance with COREQ guidelines.

Results: Staff described the Emergency Department Safety Checklist as a useful prompt and reminder for monitoring patients' vital signs and other aspects of care. It was also reported as effective in communicating patient care status to other staff. However, completing the checklist was also described as a task which could be overlooked during busy periods. During implementation, the checklist was promoted to staff in ways that obscured its core function of maintaining patient safety.

Conclusions: The Emergency Department Safety Checklist can support staff in maintaining patient safety. However, it was not fully recognised by staff as a core component of everyday clinical practice.

Relevance to clinical practice: The Emergency Department Safety Checklist is a response to an overcrowded environment. To realise the potential of the checklist, emergency departments should take the following steps during implementation: (a) focus on the core function of clinical safety, (b) fully integrate the checklist into the existing workflow and (c) employ a departmental team-based approach to implementation and training.

Keywords: assessment; communication; emergency care; emergency department; implementation; patient safety; rounding.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Emma Redfern, one of the authors, is a Consultant in Emergency Medicine and contributed to the original design of the ED checklist. Ann Remmers and Emma Redfern are members of the West of England Academic Health Science Network who supported the roll‐out and implementation of the ED Checklist in their region. Neither Emma Redfern or Ann Remmers had access to nonanonymised data nor did they participate in the data analysis stage, and they did contribute to the background, discussion and conclusions of the paper.

References

    1. Aveling, E.‐L. , McCulloch, P. , & Dixon‐Woods, M. (2013). A qualitative study comparing experiences of the surgical safety checklist in hospitals in high‐income and low‐income countries. British Medical Journal Open, 3(8), e003039 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003039 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Boreham, N. C. , Shea, C. E. , & Mackway‐Jones, K. (2000). Clinical risk and collective competence in the hospital emergency department in the UK. Social Science & Medicine, 51(1), 83–91. 10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00441-4 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Braun, V. , & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa - DOI
    1. Catchpole, K. , & Russ, S. (2015). The problem with checklists. BMJ Quality & Safety, 24(9), 545–549. 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004431 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Christiansen, A. , Coventry, L. , Graham, R. , Jacob, E. , Twigg, D. , & Whitehead, L. (2018). Intentional rounding in acute adult healthcare settings: A systematic mixed‐method review. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 27(9–10), 1759–1792. 10.1111/jocn.14370 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types