RESUMEN
Background: International research shows that medical errors (MEs) are a major threat to patient safety. The present study aimed to describe MEs and barriers to reporting them in Shiraz public hospitals, Iran. Methods: A cross-sectional, retrospective study was conducted in 10 Shiraz public hospitals in the south of Iran, 2013. Using the standardised checklist of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (referred to the Clinical Governance Department and recorded documentations) and Uribe questionnaire, we gathered the data in the hospitals. Results: A total of 4379 MEs were recorded in 10 hospitals. The highest frequency (27.1%) was related to systematic errors. Besides, most of the errors had occurred in the largest hospital (54.9%), internal wards (36.3%), and morning shifts (55.0%). The results revealed a significant association between the MEs and wards and hospitals (p < 0.001). Moreover, individual and organisational factors were the barriers to reporting ME in the studied hospitals. Also, a significant correlation was observed between the ME reporting barriers and the participants’ job experiences (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The medical errors were highly frequent in the studied hospitals especially in the larger hospitals, morning shift and in the nursing practice. Moreover, individual and organisational factors were considered as the barriers to reporting MEs.
RESUMEN
Background: Anemia is the most common blood disorder observed in vulnerable groups and affects their efficiency in their everyday activities. Possible complications of the disease may be reduced or prevented by screening of patients. Screening programs impose certain costs upon the health system, which may offset their positive effects. Whether the positive impacts of screening outweigh its costs is a subject of debate among policy-makers. In this research, we have conducted a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of anemia screening
Methods: The Pubmed, Science Direct, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases were searched for relevant results dating between 1962-2010 using key words. The references of the related articles were gone over manually. In the end, Persian databases were also examined for results
Results: Using data from the four mentioned databases, a total of 722 articles were elected, which, after evaluation, were narrowed down to 4. Of these, 3 focused on newborns and infants. Disparity existed among obtained results, such that no two articles were similar, and this made making comparisons between them cumbersome and sometimes even impossible. Only one study evaluated cost-effectiveness of anemia screening in vulnerable target groups
Conclusions: Research findings show that there is not enough evidence of cost-effectiveness of screening for decision-making. Bearing in mind the importance of the matter to health policy-makers, due to high prevalence of iron deficiency anemia in low-and middle-income countries, conduction of research in this field seems necessary
RESUMEN
Breast cancer is the leading cause of malignancy among women. Screening using mammography is proposed as an effective intervention for reducing early deaths due to breast cancer. We conducted a systematic review to assess the cost-effectiveness of such screening programs. We searched Medline, Scopus and Google Scholar and complemented it by other searches using sensitive search terms from 1993-2010. We screened the titles and abstracts, assessed the full texts of the remaining studies, and extracted data to a pre-designed data extraction sheet. Studies were categorized according to the age groups of the target population. We used narrative synthesis approaches for analyzing the data. Twenty-eight articles met the minimum inclusion criteria, mostly from high income settings. All studies used secondary data, and a variety of modeling techniques, age groups, screening intervals and outcome measures. Cost per life year gained, ranging from [dollar sign]1,634 [once at the age of 50 in India] to [dollar sign]65,000 [extending the lower age limit of screening to 40 Australian study], was the most commonly used outcome measure. Biennial screening test for those aged 50-70 years seems to be the most cost-effective option [[dollar sign]2685]. Biennial screening for aged 50-70 years is the most cost-effective option among alternative scenarios. Screening those aged less than 50 is not recommended. Further studies in low-income and middle-income countries, and cost effectiveness studies along with randomized trials are required. To improve the comparability of the findings, future studies should include biennial screening in 50-70 age groups as an alternative strategy