PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

John Sandars

Publications and source records attributed to John Sandars.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

Improving the implementation of evidence-based practice: a knowledge management perspective.

Experience of knowledge management initiatives in non-health care organizations can offer useful insights, and strategies, to implement evidence-based practice in health care. Knowledge management offers a structured process for the generation, storage, distribution and application of knowledge in organizations. This includes both tacit knowledge (personal experience) and explicit knowledge (evidence). Communities of practice are a key component of knowledge management and have been recognized to be essential for the implementation of change in organizations. It is within communities of practice that tacit knowledge is actively integrated with explicit knowledge. Organizational factors that limit the development of knowledge management, including communities of practice, in non-health care organizations need to be overcome if the potential is to be achieved within health care.

Diffusion of Innovation↗

Restrictions impeding web-based courses: a survey of publishers' variation in authorising access to high quality on-line literature.

BACKGROUND: Web-based delivery of educational programmes is becoming increasingly popular and is expected to expand, especially in medicine. The successful implementation of these programmes is reliant on their ability to provide access to web based materials, including high quality published work. Publishers' responses to requests to access health literature in the context of developing an electronic Master's degree course are described. METHODS: Two different permission requests were submitted to publishers. The first was to store an electronic version of a journal article, to which we subscribe, on a secure password protected server. The second was to reproduce extracts of published material on password protected web pages and CD Rom. RESULTS: Eight of 16 publishers were willing to grant permission to store electronic versions of articles without levying charges additional to the subscription. Twenty of 35 publishers gave permission to reproduce extracts of published work at no fee. Publishers' responses were highly variable to the requests for access to published material. This may be influenced by vague terminology within the 'fair dealing' provision in the copyright legislation, which seems to leave it open to individual interpretation. Considerable resource costs were incurred by the exercise. Time expended included those incurred by us: research to identify informed representatives within the publishing organisation, request 'chase-ups' and alternative examples being sought if publishers were uncooperative; and the publisher when dealing with numerous permission requests. Financial costs were also incurred by both parties through additional staffing and paperwork generated by the permission process, the latter including those purely borne by educators due to the necessary provision of photocopy 'course packs' when no suitably alternative material could be found if publishers were uncooperative. Finally we discuss the resultant bias in material towards readily available electronic resources as a result of publisher's uncooperative stance and encourage initiatives that aim to improve open electronic access. CONCLUSIONS: The permission request process has been expensive and has resulted in reduced access for students to the relevant literature. Variations in the responses from publishers suggest that for educational purposes common policies could be agreed and unnecessary restrictions removed in the future.

CD-ROM↗

The frequency and nature of medical error in primary care: understanding the diversity across studies.

BACKGROUND: The identification and reduction of medical error has become a major priority for all health care providers, including primary care. Understanding the frequency and nature of medical error in primary care is a first step in developing a policy to reduce harm and improve patient safety. There has been scant research into this area. OBJECTIVES: This review had two objectives; first, to identify the frequency and nature of error in primary care, and, secondly, to consider the possible causes for the diversity in the stated rates and nature of error in primary care. METHODS: Literature searches of English language studies identified in the National Patient Safety Foundation bibliography database, in Medline and in Embase were carried out. Studies that were relevant to the purpose of the study were included. Additional information was obtained from a specialist medico-legal database. RESULTS: Studies identified that medical error occurs between five and 80 times per 100000 consultations, mainly related to the processes involved in diagnosis and treatment. Prescribing and prescription errors have been identified to occur in up to 11% of all prescriptions, mainly related to errors in dose. There are a wide variety of definitions and methods used to identify the frequency and nature of medical error. Incident reporting, systematic identification and medico-legal databases reveal differing aspects, and there are additional perspectives obtained from GPs, primary health care workers and patients. CONCLUSION: An understanding of the true frequency and nature of medical error is complicated by the different definitions and methods used in the studies. Further research is warranted to understand the complex nature and causes of such errors that occur in primary care so that appropriate policy decisions to improve patient safety can be made.

Communication↗