A Framework for Classifying Patient Safety Practices

Results from an Expert Consensus Process

Published In: BMJ Quality & Safety, v. 20, no. 7, July 2011, p. 618-624

Posted on RAND.org on January 01, 2011

by Sydney Dy, Stephanie L. Taylor, Lauren H. Carr, Robbie Foy, Peter J. Pronovost, John C. Ovretveit, Robert M. Wachter, Lisa V. Rubenstein, Susanne Hempel, Kathryn M. McDonald, et al.

Read More

Access further information on this document at BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

OBJECTIVE: Development of a coherent literature evaluating patient safety practices has been hampered by the lack of an underlying conceptual framework. The authors describe issues and choices in describing and classifying diverse patient safety practices (PSPs). METHODS: The authors developed a framework to classify PSPs by identifying and synthesising existing conceptual frameworks, evaluating the draft framework by asking a group of experts to use it to classify a diverse set of PSPs and revising the framework through an expert-panel consensus process. RESULTS: The 11 classification dimensions in the framework include: regulatory versus voluntary; setting; feasibility; individual activity versus organisational change; temporal (one-time vs repeated/long-term); pervasive versus targeted; common versus rare events; PSP maturity; degree of controversy/conflicting evidence; degree of behavioural change required for implementation; and sensitivity to context. CONCLUSION: This framework offers a way to classify and compare PSPs, and thereby to interpret the patient-safety literature. Further research is needed to develop understanding of these dimensions, how they evolve as the patient safety field matures, and their relative utilities in describing, evaluating and implementing PSPs.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.