Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol ; 31(2): 129-144, 2017 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29224692

ABSTRACT

People frequently live for many years with multiple chronic conditions (multimorbidity) that impair health outcomes and are expensive to manage. Multimorbidity has been shown to reduce quality of life and increase mortality. People with multimorbidity also rely more heavily on health and care services and have poorer work outcomes. Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are ubiquitous in multimorbidity because of their high prevalence, shared risk factors, and shared pathogenic processes amongst other long-term conditions. Additionally, these conditions significantly contribute to the total impact of multimorbidity, having been shown to reduce quality of life, increase work disability, and increase treatment burden and healthcare costs. For people living with multimorbidity, MSDs could impair the ability to cope and maintain health and independence, leading to precipitous physical and social decline. Recognition, by health professionals, policymakers, non-profit organisations, and research funders, of the impact of musculoskeletal health in multimorbidity is essential when planning support for people living with multimorbidity.


Subject(s)
Musculoskeletal Diseases/epidemiology , Quality of Life/psychology , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Chronic Disease , Disease Management , Female , Humans , Male , Multimorbidity , Prevalence , Risk Factors
5.
Annu Rev Public Health ; 31: 479-97 1 p following 497, 2010.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20070203

ABSTRACT

Medical errors and adverse events are now recognized as major threats to both individual and public health worldwide. This review provides a broad perspective on major effective, established, or promising strategies to reduce medical errors and harm. Initiatives to improve safety can be conceptualized as a "safety onion" with layers of protection, depending on their degree of remove from the patient. Interventions discussed include those applied at the levels of the patient (patient engagement and disclosure), the caregiver (education, teamwork, and checklists), the local workplace (culture and workplace changes), and the system (information technology and incident reporting systems). Promising interventions include forcing functions, computerized prescriber order entry with decision support, checklists, standardized handoffs and simulation training. Many of the interventions described still lack strong evidence of benefit, but this should not hold back implementation. Rather, it should spur innovation accompanied by evaluation and publication to share the results.


Subject(s)
Medical Errors/prevention & control , Safety Management/methods , Humans , Organizational Culture , Quality of Health Care
6.
BMJ ; 339: b5213, 2009 Dec 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20007665

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To establish mortality from pandemic A/H1N1 2009 influenza up to 8 November 2009. DESIGN: Investigation of all reported deaths related to pandemic A/H1N1 in England. SETTING: Mandatory reporting systems established in acute hospitals and primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Physicians responsible for the patient. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Numbers of deaths from influenza combined with mid-range estimates of numbers of cases of influenza to calculate age specific case fatality rates. Underlying conditions, time course of illness, and antiviral treatment. RESULTS: With the official mid-range estimate for incidence of pandemic A/H1N1, the overall estimated case fatality rate was 26 (range 11-66) per 100 000. It was lowest for children aged 5-14 (11 (range 3-36) per 100 000) and highest for those aged >or=65 (980 (range 300-3200) per 100 000). In the 138 people in whom the confirmed cause of death was pandemic A/H1N1, the median age was 39 (interquartile range 17-57). Two thirds of patients who died (92, 67%) would now be eligible for the first phase of vaccination in England. Fifty (36%) had no, or only mild, pre-existing illness. Most patients (108, 78%) had been prescribed antiviral drugs, but of these, 82 (76%) did not receive them within the first 48 hours of illness. CONCLUSIONS: Viewed statistically, mortality in this pandemic compares favourably with 20th century influenza pandemics. A lower population impact than previous pandemics, however, is not a justification for public health inaction. Our data support the priority vaccination of high risk groups. We observed delayed antiviral use in most fatal cases, which suggests an opportunity to reduce deaths by making timely antiviral treatment available, although the lack of a control group limits the ability to extrapolate from this observation. Given that a substantial minority of deaths occur in previously healthy people, there is a case for extending the vaccination programme and for continuing to make early antiviral treatment widely available.


Subject(s)
Disease Outbreaks , Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype , Influenza, Human/mortality , Adolescent , Adult , Age Distribution , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Cause of Death , Child , Child, Preschool , England/epidemiology , Female , Health Surveys , Humans , Incidence , Influenza, Human/drug therapy , Male , Middle Aged , Residence Characteristics , Sex Distribution , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...