Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

D M Berwick

Publications and source records attributed to D M Berwick.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Not again!

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Antineoplastic Agents, Phytogenic↗

Healthcare in a land called PeoplePower: nothing about me without me.

In a 5-day retreat at a Salzburg Seminar attended by 64 individuals from 29 countries, teams of health professionals, patient advocates, artists, reporters and social scientists adopted the guiding principle of 'nothing about me without me' and created the country of PeoplePower. Designed to shift health care from 'biomedicine' to 'infomedicine', patients and health workers throughout PeoplePower join in informed, shared decision-making and governance. Drawing, where possible, on computer-based guidance and communication technologies, patients and clinicians contribute actively to the patient record, transcripts of clinical encounters are shared, and patient education occurs primarily in the home, school and community-based organizations. Patients and clinicians jointly develop individual 'quality contracts', serving as building blocks for quality measurement and improvement systems that aggregate data, while reflecting unique attributes of individual patients and clinicians. Patients donate process and outcome data to national data banks that fuel epidemiological research and evidence-based improvement systems. In PeoplePower hospitals, constant patient and employee feedback informs quality improvement work teams of patients and health professionals. Volunteers work actively in all units, patient rooms are information centres that transform their shape and decor as needs and individual preferences dictate, and arts and humanities programmes nourish the spirit. In the community, from the earliest school days the citizenry works with health professionals to adopt responsible health behaviours. Communities join in selecting and educating health professionals and barter systems improve access to care. Finally, lay individuals partner with professionals on all local, regional and national governmental and private health agencies.

Community-Institutional Relations↗

Reducing adverse drug events: lessons from a breakthrough series collaborative.

BACKGROUND: In January 1996, 38 hospitals and health care organizations (for a total of 40 hospitals) in the United States came together in an Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI; Boston) Breakthrough Series collaborative to reduce adverse drug events-injuries related to the use or nonuse of medications. METHODS: The participants were taught the Model for Improvement, a method for rapid-cycle change and evaluation, and were then coached on how to identify their own problem areas and develop changes in practice for rapid-cycle testing. These changes could be implementation of one or more known medication error prevention practices or new practices developed. RESULTS: During a 15-month period the 40 hospitals conducted a total of 739 tests of changes. Process changes accounted for 63% of the cycles; the remainder consisted of preliminary data gathering, consensus-building, or education cycles. Eight types of changes were implemented by seven or more hospitals, with a success rate of 70%. These changes included non-punitive reporting, ensuring documentation of allergy information, standardizing medication administration times, and implementing chemotherapy protocols. DISCUSSION: Success in making significant changes was associated with strong leadership, effective processes, and appropriate choice of intervention. Successful teams were able to define, clearly state, and relentlessly pursue their aims, and then chose practical interventions and moved early into changing a process. They did not spend months collecting data before beginning a change. Changes that were most successful were those that attempted to change processes, not people. Health care organizations committed to patient safety need not regard current performance limits as inevitable.

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems↗

Continuous quality improvement for patients with back pain.

Recent evidence has changed traditional approaches to low back pain, suggesting minimal bed rest, highly selective imaging, and early return to normal activities. However, there are wide geographical variations in care, and substantial gaps between practice and evidence. This project sought to merge scientific evidence about back pain and knowledge about behavior change to help organizations improve care for back pain. Participating insurance plans, HMOs, and group practices focused on problems they themselves identified. The year-long program included quarterly meetings, coaching for rapid cycles of change, a menu of potential interventions, and recommendations for monitoring outcomes. Participants interacted through meetings, e-mail, and conference calls. Of the 22 participating organizations, 6 (27%) made major progress. Typical changes were reduced imaging, bed rest, and work loss, and increased patient education and satisfaction. Specific examples were a 30% decrease in plain x-rays, a 100% increase in use of patient education materials, and an 81% drop in prescribed bed rest. Despite the complexity of care for back pain, rapid improvements appear feasible. Several organizations had major improvements, and most experienced at least modest improvements. Key elements of successful programs included focus on a small number of clinical goals, frequent measurement of outcomes among small samples of patients, vigilance in maintaining gains; involvement of office staffs as well as physicians, and changes in standard protocols for imaging, physical therapy, and referral.

Back Pain↗

Service quality in health care.

Although US health care is described as "the world's largest service industry," the quality of service--that is, the characteristics that shape the experience of care beyond technical competence--is rarely discussed in the medical literature. This article illustrates service quality principles by analyzing a routine encounter in health care from a service quality point of view. This illustration and a review of related literature from both inside and outside health care has led to the following 2 premises: First, if high-quality service had a greater presence in our practices and institutions, it would improve clinical outcomes and patient and physician satisfaction while reducing cost, and it would create competitive advantage for those who are expert in its application. Second, many other industries in the service sector have taken service quality to a high level, their techniques are readily transferable to health care, and physicians caring for patients can learn from them.

Delivery of Health Care↗

Cooperation: the foundation of improvement.

Cooperation--working together to produce mutual benefit or attain a common purpose--is almost inseparable from the quest for improvement. Although the case for cooperation can be made on ethical grounds, neither the motivation for nor the effects of cooperation need to be interpreted solely in terms of altruism. Cooperation can be a shrewd and pragmatic strategy for accomplishing personal goals in an interdependent system. Earlier papers in this series have explored the conceptual roots of modern approaches to improvement, which lie in systems theory. To improve systems, we must usually attend first and foremost to interactions. Among humans, "better interaction" is almost synonymous with "better cooperation." Physicians have ample opportunities and, indeed, an obligation to cooperate with other physicians in the same or different specialties, with nurses and other clinical workers, with administrators, and with patients and families. Many intellectual disciplines have made cooperation an object of study. These include anthropology; social psychology; genetics; biology; mathematics; game theory; linguistics; operations research; economics; and, of course, moral and rational philosophy. Scientifically grounded methods to enhance cooperation include developing a shared purpose; creating an open, safe environment; including all who share a common purpose and encouraging diverse viewpoints; negotiating agreement; and insisting on fairness and equity in the application of rules. These methods apply at the organizational level and at the level of the individual physician. This paper describes the application of these methods at the organizational level and focuses on one especially successful example of system-level cooperation in a care delivery site where interactions matter a great deal: the modern intensive care unit.

Cooperative Behavior↗

Physicians as leaders in improving health care: a new series in Annals of Internal Medicine.

Searching for one word to describe the state of mind of the physician in the United States today, we might choose beleaguered. Threats appear from all sides--from payers, would-be managers of care, the growth of technology, and even patients. The rhetoric is one of siege and battle, and the dynamic seems to be a clash of values from which only one winner can emerge. But scientific and health services research suggest otherwise. Science suggests that health care could, indeed, perform a great deal better than it does today and that a shared aim of improving health outcomes for patients at a cost that society can afford is sensible and within reach. However, achievement of these improvements will require of physicians not handwringing and resistance to change but concerted, positive, capable leadership. The goal of this series in Annals is to describe a new knowledge base that will help physicians participate effectively in the redesign of the health care system. The series is intended to raise the curiosity of physicians about the skills they will need to become more active and influential citizens of the health care community in accomplishing improvements. These skills will help physicians better deploy their clinical expertise and professional purpose in a debate that has heretofore been informed primarily by economics.

Humans↗