ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Define a minimum set of indicators for person-focused-care applying for type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2), as a complementary metric to current clinical-healthcare indicators. METHODS: Qualitative consensus-building study (involving professionals and patients) structured in three stages: Metaplan to capture information, Delphi to agree on criteria and indicators, and consensus conference to ensure feasibility and relevance of the proposal. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on a total of nine indicators upon: shared decision-making, self-care, adherence, renal function screening, activities of daily living, individualized therapeutic plan, vascular risk assessment, working life and human treatment. These indicators were grouped into three dimensions: the person with oneself, the person with one's family, and the person with the health system. CONCLUSIONS: These indicators make it possible to establish alternative metrics to determine the degree of progress in a person-centered attention in case of DM2.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Activities of Daily Living , Consensus , Delphi Technique , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/therapy , Humans , Qualitative ResearchABSTRACT
Fundamento. La información al paciente víctima de un evento adverso (EA) presenta ciertas particularidades en función del marco legal del país en el que se produzca, especialmente en lo referido al ofrecimiento de una disculpa. En el presente trabajo se pretende establecer los límites y las condiciones que debemos considerar a la hora de trasladar una disculpa al paciente que ha sufrido un EA. Método. Conferencia de consenso entre 26 profesionales de distintas comunidades autónomas, instituciones y perfiles profesionales con experiencia acreditada en la gestión de sistemas de Seguridad del Paciente y Derecho Penal de diferentes ámbitos laborales (sanidad, aseguradoras, inspección, académico) (AU)
Background. Disclosing information to a patient who is a victim of an adverse event (AE) presents some particularities depending on the legal framework in the country where the AE occurred. The aim of this study is to identify the limits and conditions when apologizing to a patient who has suffered an AE. Methods. A consensus conference involving 26 professionals from different autonomous communities, institutions, and profiles (health, insurance, inspection, academic) with accredited experience in patient safety management systems and criminal law (AU)
