A Multi-Stakeholder Survey Examining Incident Review Processes in a National Healthcare System: A Study Protocol

Background Incident reporting is central to patient safety, yet translating review findings into systemic learning remains challenging. Within the Irish Health Service Executive (HSE) 2020 Incident Management Framework (IMF), Improvement Planning and Monitoring (Step 6) is where findings are intended to become service change. How well reviews achieve this, and how the review methodologies in use shape that performance, has not been systematically examined. This protocol sets out a study examining how these methodologies operate in practice and the perceived quality of the recommendations they produce, by capturing the accounts of multiple stakeholders linked to the same reviews, with particular attention to human factors in the transition from learning to action. Methods The study uses a cross-sectional, mixed-methods survey design. A stratified random sample of 96 incident reviews will be drawn from the National Incident Management System (NIMS): 48 Category 1 (major/severe harm) and 48 Category 2 (moderate harm), equally divided between acute and community settings. Seven role-tailored instruments, mapped to four stakeholder categories (reviewers and commissioners; clinical staff; implementers; patients, service users and families), combine rating-scale and written-response questions organised around the six IMF principles. Quantitative data will be analysed using descriptive and non-parametric methods, qualitative data using reflexive thematic analysis, and the two strands integrated through joint displays. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval has been granted by the School of Psychology Research Ethics Committee at Trinity College Dublin and the HSE National Research Ethics Committee. A pilot phase of five reviews will precede national administration. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication, conference presentation, and a summary report to the HSE, and are intended to identify systemic barriers to improvement planning and inform a national logic model for shared learning.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
HRB Open Research
Published
2026-10-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.14557.1
Primary Topic
Patient Safety and Medication Errors
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Multi-Stakeholder Survey Examining Incident Review Processes in a National Healthcare System: A Study Protocol

Sam Cromie, Loretta Jenkins, Jill Poots, Vanessa Dunne et al.
HRB Open Research
Patient Safety and Medication Errors
article

A Multi-Stakeholder Survey Examining Incident Review Processes in a National Healthcare System: A Study Protocol

Sam Cromie, Loretta Jenkins, Jill Poots, Vanessa Dunne, Julia Louw, Lorraine Schwanberg, Tianran Zhang, Samantha Hughes, Killian Aughey-Evans
article en

Abstract

Background Incident reporting is central to patient safety, yet translating review findings into systemic learning remains challenging. Within the Irish Health Service Executive (HSE) 2020 Incident Management Framework (IMF), Improvement Planning and Monitoring (Step 6) is where findings are intended to become service change. How well reviews achieve this, and how the review methodologies in use shape that performance, has not been systematically examined. This protocol sets out a study examining how these methodologies operate in practice and the perceived quality of the recommendations they produce, by capturing the accounts of multiple stakeholders linked to the same reviews, with particular attention to human factors in the transition from learning to action. Methods The study uses a cross-sectional, mixed-methods survey design. A stratified random sample of 96 incident reviews will be drawn from the National Incident Management System (NIMS): 48 Category 1 (major/severe harm) and 48 Category 2 (moderate harm), equally divided between acute and community settings. Seven role-tailored instruments, mapped to four stakeholder categories (reviewers and commissioners; clinical staff; implementers; patients, service users and families), combine rating-scale and written-response questions organised around the six IMF principles. Quantitative data will be analysed using descriptive and non-parametric methods, qualitative data using reflexive thematic analysis, and the two strands integrated through joint displays. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval has been granted by the School of Psychology Research Ethics Committee at Trinity College Dublin and the HSE National Research Ethics Committee. A pilot phase of five reviews will precede national administration. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication, conference presentation, and a summary report to the HSE, and are intended to identify systemic barriers to improvement planning and inform a national logic model for shared learning.

HRB Open ResearchVol. 9
Trinity College Dublin (IE), Health Service Executive (IE), National Patient Safety Foundation (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Patient Safety and Medication Errors
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon