ANZCA and FPM CPD Program resources: Clinical governance/quality assurance committee work

BMJ Quality & Safety provides a rich mix of news, opinion, debate and research for academics, clinicians, healthcare managers and policy makers. It encourages the science of improvement, debate, and new thinking on improving the quality of healthcare. The journal is led by a patient-focused editorial team with a view towards helping all team members improve their knowledge with the overall goal of improving patient care. The journal integrates the academic and clinical aspects of quality and safety in healthcare by encouraging academics to create evidence and knowledge valued by clinicians and clinicians to value using evidence and knowledge to improve quality.

BMJ Open Quality is dedicated to publishing high quality, peer reviewed healthcare improvement work. Articles covering original research, local, national and international QI projects, value-based healthcare improvement initiatives and educational improvement work are all considered.

BMJ Open Quality uses continuous publication online, to ensure timely, up-to-date knowledge is available worldwide. The journal adheres to a rigorous and transparent peer review process and papers are considered on the basis of methodological soundness rather than priority or novelty.

Published monthly, The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety is a peer-reviewed publication dedicated to providing health professionals with the information they need to promote the quality and safety of health care.

Abstract
The advent of newer developments in anesthesia techniques and current clinical scenario has necessitated assurance of quality anesthesia services delivery. Numerous factors including availability of newer drugs, availability of newer advanced monitoring gadgets, increased awareness among the patient population, implementation of newer medico-legal laws and professional competitiveness has mandated a quality control and assurance in anesthesia. These domains of quality control are adapted from public health and are being incorporated into daily anesthesia practice in a gradual and phased manner. Quality control and assurance can be assessed and measured with certain quality indicators, which are also helpful in determining the perioperative outcome in anesthesia and surgical practice. Patient's perception about various anesthetic procedures, drug effects and recovery state are the prime underlying basis for assessing the quality assurance and control. At the same time, a positive impact of feedback mechanism cannot be under-emphasized while aiming for improvement in delivery of quality anesthesia services. The current review is aimed at highlighting the important aspects associated with quality assurance and quality control in anesthesia practice.

Abstract
Purpose Clinical governance (CG) is an important foundation for a high-performing health care system, with many countries supporting its development. CG policy may be developed and implemented nationally, or devolved to a local level, with implications for the overall approach to implementation and policy uptake. However, it is not known whether one of these two approaches is more effective. The purpose of this paper is to probe this question. Its setting is Ireland and New Zealand, two broadly comparable countries with similar CG policies. Ireland's was nationally led, while New Zealand's was devolved to local districts. This leads to the question of whether these different approaches to implementation make a difference. Design/methodology/approach Data from surveys of health professionals in both countries were used to compare performance with CG development. Findings The study showed that Ireland's approach produced a slightly better performance, raising questions about the merits of devolving responsibility for policy implementation to the local level. Research limitations/implications The Irish and New Zealand surveys both had lower-than-desirable response rates, which is not uncommon for studies of health professionals such as this. The low response rates mean the findings may be subject to selection bias. Originality/value Despite the importance of the question of whether a national or local approach to policy implementation is more effective, few studies specifically focus on this, meaning that this study provides a new contribution to the topic.

Abstract
The safety of anesthesia characteristic of high-income countries today is not matched in low-resource settings with poor infrastructure, shortages of anesthesia providers, essential drugs, equipment, and supplies. Health care is delivered through complex systems. Achieving sustainable widespread improvement globally will require an understanding of how to influence such systems. Health outcomes depend not only on a country's income, but also on how resources are allocated, and both vary substantially, between and within countries. Safety is particularly important in anesthesia because anesthesia is intrinsically hazardous and not intrinsically therapeutic. Nevertheless, other elements of the quality of health care, notably access, must also be considered. More generally, there are certain prerequisites within society for health, captured in the Jakarta declaration. It is necessary to have adequate infrastructure (notably for transport and primary health care) and hospitals capable of safely carrying out the "Bellwether Procedures" (cesarean delivery, laparotomy, and the treatment of compound fractures). Surgery, supported by safe anesthesia, is critical to the health of populations, but avoidable harm from health care (including very high mortality rates from anesthesia in many parts of the world) is a major global problem. Thus, surgical and anesthesia services must not only be provided, they must be safe. The global anesthesia workforce crisis is a major barrier to achieving this. Many anesthetics today are administered by nonphysicians with limited training and little access to supervision or support, often working in very challenging circumstances. Many organizations, notably the World Health Organization and the World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists, are working to improve access to and safety of anesthesia and surgery around the world. Challenges include collaboration with local stakeholders, coordination of effort between agencies, and the need to influence national health policy makers to achieve sustainable improvement. It is conceivable that safe anesthesia and perioperative care could be provided for essential surgical services today by clinicians with moderate levels of training using relatively simple (but appropriately designed and maintained) equipment and a limited number of inexpensive generic medications. However, there is a minimum standard for these resources, below which reasonable safety cannot be assured. This minimum (at least) should be available to all. Not only more resources, but also more equitable distribution of existing resources is required. Thus, the starting point for global access to safe anesthesia is acceptance that access to health care in general should be a basic human right everywhere.

Abstract
Surgical patients are at risk of harm from avoidable adverse events, many of which are at least in part attributable to failures in teamwork and communication. We undertook a systematic review of studies of interventions to improve teamwork and communication in the operating room (OR) that measured an outcome important for patient care in the clinical environment. We found good evidence to support several interventions: structured approaches to information sharing between OR team members; ongoing programmes of team training; and organisational changes to support team function. Many studies demonstrated improved team function in the clinical environment, improved OR processes, and/or improved patient outcomes. This review identified successful approaches to improving teamwork and communication in the OR and provided recommendations for practice.