Despite impressive progress in technical skills, the rate of adverse events in surgery remains unfavourably high. The variation seen in surgical outcomes may be dependent on the quality of ward-based surgical care provided to post-operative patients with complications, specifically, the recognition, communication and response to patient deterioration. This process can be termed escalation of care and is an under-explored area of surgical research. This thesis demonstrates the impact of delays in the escalation of care process on patient outcome. The facilitators of, and barriers to, escalation of care are then identified and described in the context of the UK surgical department. In order to prioritise areas within the escalation of care process amenable to intervention, a systematic risk assessment was conducted revealing suboptimal communication technology and a lack of human factors education as key failures. To ensure that communication technology intervention was conducted based on evidence, several exploratory studies describe the current methods of communication in surgery and explore areas of innovation and intervention. Following this, a human factors intervention bundle was implemented within a busy surgical department, which successfully improved supervision, escalation of care and safety culture. This thesis describes, for the first time, escalation of care in surgery and outlines important strategies for intervention in this safety-critical process. To date, ward-based care has been one of the most under-researched areas in surgery, despite its clear importance. The tools to improve escalation of care in surgery have been described and initial attempts at implementation have demonstrated great promise. Future use of these strategies should benefit surgeons and other clinical staff of all grades and ultimately, the surgical patient.

Background Recent conflicts have seen an increase in trauma related military amputees who incur complex injuries which result in varied residual limbs. In many cases these amputees have been provided with state of the art (SOTA) components with the expectation that they will transfer into NHS care after military discharge. However, there is a lack of knowledge around how prosthetic prescriptions are made in both the MOD and NHS, including patient involvement. It is important to explore prosthetic prescription decisions to enhance the quality, consistency and equity of care delivery for trauma amputees. This thesis explores decision making in prosthetic care for trauma amputees in the UK during this period of change. Aims To explore aspects of prosthetic care provision in the UK including clinical decision making, patient experience and the transition of prosthetic care from the MOD to the NHS. Design An exploratory qualitative project informed by decision making and patient involvement theory. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with nineteen clinical staff involved in prosthetic provision, six civilian and five veteran trauma amputees. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. Findings Prosthetists used a wide range of factors in making prescription decisions, including physical characteristics, patients’ goals, and predicted activity levels. Prescription decision making varied depending on the prosthetists’ level of experience and the different ‘cues’ identified. In some cases there was a lack of transparency about drivers for the prescription choice. Prescription decisions are influenced by long term relationships between prosthetist and patient, allowing a trial and error approach with increasing patient involvement over time. Patient experiences of their trauma amputation influenced their approach to rehabilitation. Patients reported wanting different levels of involvement in their prosthetic care, however, communication was essential for all. Veteran amputees benefited from peer support opportunities which NHS services were less conducive to. However, NHS amputees were more likely to have been ‘involved’ in care decisions. The expectations that MOD patients had of inferior care in the NHS were not realised in the majority of veteran cases. Recommendations Research is needed to support prosthetists’ decisions to become more consistent and transparent. The NHS should consider introducing a peer support model for trauma patients, and particularly in the early stages of rehabilitation.