Exploring a new approach to improving safety
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Exploring the contextual factors that influence how principles of Resilient Healthcare can be applied to safety improvement within a maternity service: A participatory case study
IRAS ID
322800
Contact name
Ruth Baxter
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University of Leeds
Duration of Study in the UK
1 years, 2 months, 9 days
Research summary
Traditional approaches to improving safety ‘find and fix’ things that have gone wrong. Although this approach has led to safety improvements, complex problems remain. Resilient healthcare (RHC), often referred to as Safety II, offers a new perspective on improving the quality and safety of patient care. It recognises the complexity of healthcare and that people regularly adapt to ensure things ‘go right’. RHC aims to understand how care is delivered, and then tries to improve the system so that it’s easier to deliver safe care more often.
NHS staff are increasingly interested in RHC and it has been included in national policy. However, we don’t know much about how it can be applied in practice. A researcher will work within a maternity service over 12-14 months to support staff to conduct ‘RHC improvement projects’ that address the problems that maternity staff, women, babies and their families face. This research study will be conducted alongside these RHC improvement projects and aims to develop new knowledge about how RHC principles can be applied to improve safety and the things that influence our ability to do this.
Staff and members of the public will consent to data collection via observations, interviews, focus groups, document analysis, and reflective diaries. We will explore: how improvement is currently conducted; how RHC principles are applied to safety improvement; the micro, meso and macro level contextual factors that influence this; the acceptability of this approach; and whether applying RHC principles has any broader effect beyond those anticipated from the improvement projects. CAG approval is sought via precedent set criteria 10 as some observations will take place in privileged environments (e.g. handovers).
Formative and summative feedback will support the ongoing RHC improvement projects. Findings will be published in peer reviewed academic journals, and disseminated at conferences and events.REC name
East of England - Essex Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
24/EE/0162
Date of REC Opinion
11 Sep 2024
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion