Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Why evaluate ‘common sense’ quality and safety interventions?
Free
  1. Angus IG Ramsay,
  2. Naomi J Fulop
  1. Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Angus IG Ramsay, Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 7HB, UK; angus.ramsay{at}ucl.ac.uk

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

At times, the decision to redesign a healthcare service may be driven by a sense that ‘something must be done’, for instance evidence of a significant failure within a hospital or national data indicating variable provision of evidence-based care. Under such circumstances, planners may look to their past experiences or let themselves be guided by research evidence; they may also turn to solutions perceived as self-evidently good ideas. Examples of such apparently ‘common sense’ interventions include the ongoing drives towards integration of various domains of care1 and 7-day working2: these are commonly seen as likely to bring about such desirable improvements as increased provision of evidence-based care and better patient experience and outcomes.

Perhaps another apparently common sense intervention is the introduction of single-room accommodation, the impact of which in a hospital based in the English NHS is evaluated by Maben et al.3 By moving staff and patients to a nearby, newly built hospital, the cost and disruption likely to result from converting a hospital from traditional wards and bays to single rooms were avoided, making this intervention relatively straightforward. Further, the intervention …

View Full Text

Linked Articles