Quality improvement collaborative for improving patient care delivery in Argentine public health sector intensive care units.

BACKGROUND: The demand for healthcare services during the COVID-19 pandemic was excessive for less-resourced settings, with intensive care units (ICUs) taking the heaviest toll. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to achieve adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) use in 90% of patient encounters, to reach 90% compliance with objectives of patient flow (OPF) and to provide emotional support tools to 90% of healthcare workers (HCWs). METHODS: We conducted a quasi-experimental study with an interrupted time-series design in 14 ICUs in Argentina. We randomly selected adult critically ill patients admitted from July 2020 to July 2021 and active HCWs in the same period. We implemented a quality improvement collaborative (QIC) with a baseline phase (BP) and an intervention phase (IP). The QIC included learning sessions, periods of action and improvement cycles (plan-do-study-act) virtually coached by experts via platform web-based activities. The main study outcomes encompassed the following elements: proper utilisation of PPE, compliance with nine specific OPF using daily goal sheets through direct observations and utilisation of a web-based tool for tracking emotional well-being among HCWs. RESULTS: We collected 7341 observations of PPE use (977 in BP and 6364 in IP) with an improvement in adequate use from 58.4% to 71.9% (RR 1.2, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.29, p<0.001). We observed 7428 patient encounters to evaluate compliance with 9 OPF (879 in BP and 6549 in IP) with an improvement in compliance from 53.9% to 67% (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.32, p<0.001). The results showed that HCWs did not use the support tool for self-mental health evaluation as much as expected. CONCLUSION: A QIC was effective in improving healthcare processes and adequate PPE use, even in the context of a pandemic, indicating the possibility of expanding QIC networks nationwide to improve overall healthcare delivery. The limited reception of emotional support tools requires further analyses.

In search of an international multidimensional action plan for second victim support: a narrative review.

BACKGROUND: Insights around second victims (SV) and patient safety has been growing over time. An overview of the available evidence is lacking. This review aims to describe (i) the impact a patient safety incident can have and (ii) how healthcare professionals can be supported in the aftermath of a patient safety incident. METHODS: A literature search in Medline, EMBASE and CINAHL was performed between 1 and 2010 and 26 November 2020 with studies on SV as inclusion criteria. To be included in this review the studies must include healthcare professionals involved in the aftermath of a patient safety incident. RESULTS: In total 104 studies were included. SVs can suffer from both psychosocial (negative and positive), professional and physical reactions. Support can be provided at five levels. The first level is prevention (on individual and organizational level) referring to measures taken before a patient safety incident happens. The other four levels focus on providing support in the aftermath of a patient safety incident, such as self-care of individuals and/or team, support by peers and triage, structured support by an expert in the field (professional support) and structured clinical support. CONCLUSION: The impact of a patient safety incident on healthcare professionals is broad and diverse. Support programs should be organized at five levels, starting with preventive actions followed by self-care, support by peers, structured professional support and clinical support. This multilevel approach can now be translated in different countries, networks and organizations based on their own culture, support history, structure and legal context. Next to this, they should also include the stage of recovery in which the healthcare professional is located in.

Eventos adversos evitables en atención primaria. Estudio retrospectivo de cohortes para determinar su frecuencia y gravedad / Avoidable adverse events in primary care. Retrospective cohort study to determine their frequency and severity

OBJETIVO: Determinar la frecuencia de eventos adversos evitables (EAE) en atención primaria (AP). DISEÑO: Estudio retrospectivo de cohortes. Emplazamiento: consultas de medicina de familia y pediatría de Andalucía, Aragón, Castilla La Mancha, Cataluña, Madrid, Navarra y Comunidad Valenciana. PARTICIPANTES: Se determinó revisar un mínimo de 2.397 historias clínicas (nivel de confianza del 95% y una precisión del 2%). La muestra se estratificó por grupos de edad de forma proporcional a su frecuentación y con revisión paritaria de historias de hombres y mujeres. Mediciones principales: Número y gravedad de los EAE identificados entre febrero de 2018 y septiembre de 2019. RESULTADOS: Se revisaron un total de 2.557 historias clínicas (1.928, 75.4% de pacientes adultos y 629, 24.6% pediátricos). Se identificaron 182 EAE que afectaron a 168 pacientes (7,1%, IC 95% 6,1-8,1%); en adultos 7,6% (IC 95% 6,4-8,8%) y 5,7% (IC 95% 3,9-7,5%) en pacientes pediátricos. Las mujeres sufrieron más EAE que los hombres (p = 0,004). La incidencia de EAE en niños y niñas fue similar (p = 0,3). 6 (4.1%) de los EAE supusieron un daño permanente en pacientes adultos. CONCLUSIONES: Buscar fórmulas para incrementar la seguridad en AP, particularmente en pacientes mujeres, debe seguir siendo un objetivo prioritario incluso en pediatría. Uno de cada 24 EAE supone un daño grave y permanente en el adulto

OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency of avoidable adverse events (AAEs) in Primary Care (PC). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. LOCATION: Family medicine and paediatric clinics in Andalusia, Aragon, Castilla-La Mancha, Catalonia, Madrid, Navarre, and Valencia. PARTICIPANTS: A review was performed on a designated sample of 2,397 medical records (95% confidence level and 2% accuracy). The sample was stratified by age group as regards the frequency of physician consultations and considering equal distribution of male and female patients. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Number and severity of identified AAEs from February 2018 to September 2019. RESULTS: A total of 2,557 medical records were reviewed (1,928, 75.4% of adult patients, and 629, 24.6% paediatrics). A total of 182 (7.1%, 95% CI 6.1-8.1%) AAEs that affected 168 patients were identified, which included 7.6% (95% CI 6.4-8.8%) in adults and 5.7% (95% CI 3.9-7.5%) in paediatric patients. The number of AAEs in women was higher than in men (P = 0.006). The incidence of AAEs in boys and girls was similar (P = 0.3). Permanent damage was caused by AAEs in 6 (4.1%) adult patients. CONCLUSIONS: Seeking formulas to increase patient safety in PC should remain a priority objective, particularly in female patients and in paediatrics. One in 24 AAEs causes serious and permanent damage in adults

La medida de la experiencia del paciente en el contexto de una atención centrada en el propio paciente / No disponible

En los 70, la manera en que se escuchaba a los pacientes se basó en medir su satisfacción con un episodio concreto en el que se había recibido asistencia sanitaria. A principios del siglo XXI fue evidente que el papel asignado al paciente en su relación con los profesionales y sistemas sanitarios necesitaba reorientarse. Los enfoques de atención centrada en el paciente supusieron un reto organizativo, actitudinal y profesional, en el que todavía están inmersas las organizaciones sanitarias. En este entorno se desarrolló la medida de experiencia del paciente, que guarda directa relación con el objetivo de las organizaciones sanitarias de proporcionar una atención centrada en el paciente

In the 1970s, patients' satisfaction measures were based on listening to what patients had to say, relating it to a unique procedure. In the 21st century, it became evident that the role assigned to the patient in his/her relationship with health professionals and healthcare organizations needed to be reoriented. The Patient-centered approaches involved an organizational, attitudinal, and professional challenge in which health organizations are still immersed. The patient experience measure was developed according to healthcare organizations’ goal to provide patient-centered care

Algo no estamos haciendo bien cuando informamos a los/las pacientes tras un evento adverso / Something is wrong in the way we inform patients of an adverse event

Objetivo: Analizar qué hacen hospitales y atención primaria para asegurar una información franca a los/las pacientes tras un evento adverso (EA). Método: Encuesta a 633 directivos/as y responsables de seguridad (colectivo de dirección) y 1340 profesionales de ocho comunidades autónomas. Se exploró el nivel de implantación de recomendaciones para una correcta información tras un EA. Resultados:112 (27,9%) directivos/as y 386 (35,9%) profesionales consideraron que en su centro se informaba correctamente tras un EA; 30 (7,4%) directivos/as afirmaron disponer en su centro de un protocolo sobre cómo informar; sólo 92 (17,4%) médicos/as y 93 (19,1%) enfermeros/as habían recibido entrenamiento para informar a un/a paciente tras un EA. Conclusiones: Existen importantes carencias a la hora de planificar, organizar y asegurar que el/la paciente que sufre un EA reciba una disculpa e información franca de lo sucedido y de lo que puede pasar a partir de ese momento (AU)

Objective: To analyze which actions are carried out in hospitals and primary care to ensure open disclosure to the patient after an adverse event (AE). Methods: We surveyed 633 managers and patient safety coordinates (staff) and 1340 physicians and nurses from eight autonomous communities. The level of implementation of open disclosure recommendations was explored. Results: A total of 112 (27.9%) staff and 386 (35.9%) professionals considered that patients were correctly informed after an EA; 30 (7.4%) staff claimed to have a guideline on how to report EA; only 92 medical professionals (17.4%) and 93 nurses (19.1%) had received training on open disclosure. Conclusions: There are gaps in the way of planning, organizing and ensuring that patients who suffer an AE will receive an apology with honest information about what has happened and what could subsequently happen (AU)

Morir con dignidad. Estudio sobre voluntades anticipadas / Dying with dignity. A study of living wills

Objetivo Describir el perfil de quienes han ejercido su derecho a expresar voluntades anticipadas, analizar la actitud y el conocimiento de los médicos ante ellas, y comparar las normas que regulan este derecho entre comunidades autónomas. Método Estudio descriptivo que incluye análisis mediante muestreo sistemático de 931 registros de voluntades anticipadas en la Comunidad Valenciana, encuesta en papel estructurada y autoadministrada a una muestra de 84 médicos de servicios de urgencias y unidades de cuidados intensivos (tasa respuesta del 45%), y comparación de la legislación autonómica que regula las voluntades anticipadas. Resultados Un 1,6‰ mayores de 16 años han inscrito voluntades anticipadas (relación mujer/hombre de 1,8/1), la mayoría (73,8%) utilizando un documento previamente redactado por una determinada confesión religiosa. Limitar el esfuerzo terapéutico (99%) y obtener fármacos para aliviar el dolor (98%) son las razones habituales para inscribir voluntades anticipadas. Pese a que 61 (72,6%) facultativos atendían con frecuencia a pacientes en situación terminal, sólo el 6% consultaron el registro de voluntades anticipadas en estos casos. El 28% no supo cómo consultar este registro. Hay una amplia variabilidad entre comunidades respecto a la edad para otorgar voluntades anticipadas, cómo actuar en caso de embarazo de la solicitante, ante quién otorgar voluntades anticipadas y el número de puntos en que es posible dejar constancia de estas voluntades. Conclusiones La mayoría de los otorgantes de voluntades anticipadas profesan una determinada confesión y rechazan que se les practiquen determinados tratamientos. La mayoría de los profesionales no comprueba si los enfermos en situación crítica han otorgado voluntades anticipadas. La diversidad de criterios entre comunidades complica el ejercicio del derecho a expresar estas voluntades (AU)

Objective To describe the profile of persons who exercise their right to draw up a living will, to analyze physicians’ knowledge of living wills and attitudes toward them, and to compare the regulations pertaining to this right in the distinct autonomous regions of Spain. Method A descriptive study that included an analysis of a systematic sample of 931 living wills registered in the autonomous region of Valencia (Spain), a self-administered structured questionnaire administered to a sample of 84 physicians working in emergency departments and intensive care units (45% response rate), and a comparison of the regional legislation covering living wills. Results A total of 1.6% of inhabitants aged 16 or over had registered a living will (female/male ratio: 1.8/1). Most (73.8%) used a standard document drawn up by a particular religious faith. The most common reasons for writing a living will were to limit therapeutic efforts (99%) and obtain pain-relieving drugs (98%). Although 61 physicians (72.6%) frequently attended the terminally ill, only 6% consulted the register of living wills in these situations and 28% did not know how to consult this register. There is wide variation among regions in the minimum age for registering a living will, in the procedure to be followed if the signer is pregnant, in designating a person as having the authority to make a living will, and in the number of registration points available to deposit living wills. Conclusions Most persons registering a living will are healthy individuals with a particular religious faith who reject certain treatments. Most health professionals do not check whether critically ill patients have made a living will. Exercising the rights contained in living wills is complicated by the diversity of criteria among different regions (AU)

Derechos de los pacientes. Algo más que una cuestión de actitud / Patients’ rights. More than a question of attitude

ObjetivoAnalizar si determinados derechos de los pacientes (Ley 41/2002 de autonomía del paciente [LAP]) son conocidos entre los profesionales de la medicina.Material y métodoEncuesta a profesionales de hospitales y de atención primaria con situaciones problema extraídas de sentencias judiciales y de la LAP.ResultadosUn 78% dijo conocer la LAP. El 53% sabrían explicar qué son las voluntades anticipadas. A la situación problema sobre derecho a la intimidad respondieron correctamente el 88%. El 57% acertó cuál es la mayoría de edad sanitaria. El 70% aplicó correctamente el derecho del paciente a no ser informado. Sólo un 38% respondió correctamente a los tres problemas planteados. Los aciertos son más frecuentes (odds ratio: 2,4–3,4) entre quienes dicen conocer la LAP.ConclusionesAl menos uno de cada diez profesionales podrían ver comprometida su seguridad jurídica por desconocimiento de la LAP. Los jóvenes entre 16 y 18 años tienen más difícil que se respete su derecho a la autonomía como pacientes. La información previa sobre la LAP ayuda a un mejor cumplimiento(AU)

ObjectivesTo analyze hospital and primary care physicians’ knowledge of certain patients’ rights recently modified by Spanish Law 41/2002 (law of patient autonomy).Material and methodsWe performed a voluntary survey of hospital and primary care physicians who were presented with three problem situations drawn from court decisions and the law of patient autonomy.ResultsAmong interviewed physicians, 78% were familiar with the law of patient autonomy. Fifty-three percent knew how to explain what advance wills are. Eighty-eight percent responded correctly to the problem situation concerning the right to privacy. Fifty-seven percent knew the legal age of consent for healthcare. Seventy percent correctly applied patients’ right not to be informed. Only 38% responded correctly to all three problem situations. Correct responses were more frequent (odds ratio: 2.4–3.4) among physicians who were familiar with the law of patient autonomy.ConclusionsAt least one out of every 10 physicians could be legally compromised by lack of knowledge of the law of patient autonomy. Patients’ rights were most likely to be jeopardized in patients aged between 16 and 18 years old. Prior information on the law of patient autonomy contributes to greater compliance(AU)

Noticias de prensa sobre errores clínicos y sensación de seguridad al acudir al hospital / News items about clinical errors and safety perceptions in hospital patients

Objetivo Analizar el tratamiento informativo que realiza la prensa de los errores clínicos y su influencia en los pacientes.MétodosEstudio cualitativo y cuantitativo. Primero, análisis de contenido de las noticias publicadas en 6 periódicos entre abril y noviembre de 2007. Segundo, encuesta a 829 pacientes de 5 hospitales de 4 comunidades autónomas.ResultadosSe analizan 90 casos que generan 128 noticias, con una media de 16 impactos mensuales. En 91 (71,1%) se contrastó la fuente. En 78 (60,9%) apareció el autor. El impacto de las noticias fue de −4,86 puntos (intervalo de confianza del 95% [IC95%]: −4,15–5,57). En 59 casos (57%) se atribuye el error al sistema, en 27 (21,3%) a los profesionales y en 41 (32,3%) a ambos. Ni el número de columnas (p=0,702), ni la inclusión de postitular (p=0,195), ni el apoyo gráfico (p=0,9) se mostraron relacionados con las consecuencias del error. De 829 pacientes, 515 (62,1%; IC95%: 58,8–65,4%) afirmaron haber visto u oído recientemente noticias sobre errores clínicos en prensa, radio o televisión. La percepción de seguridad disminuye cuando coinciden la preocupación por ser víctima de un error clínico y el impacto reciente de noticias sobre errores en la prensa (χ2=15,17; p=0,001).ConclusionesTodas las semanas aparece alguna noticia sobre errores clínicos en algún medio. El tratamiento en el periódico de las denuncias de supuestos errores es similar al de las noticias sobre sentencias judiciales por negligencia con daño irreparable. Las noticias sobre errores generan inseguridad en los pacientes. Es aconsejable crear espacios de encuentro entre periodistas y profesionales sanitarios(AU)

Objective To analyze how news items about clinical errors are treated by the press in Spain and their influence on patients.MethodsWe performed a quantitative and qualitative study. Firstly, news items published between April and November 2007 in six newspapers were analyzed. Secondly, 829 patients from five hospitals in four autonomous regions were surveyed.ResultsWe analyzed 90 cases generating 128 news items, representing a mean of 16 items per month. In 91 news items (71.1%) the source was checked. In 78 items (60.9%) the author could be identified. The impact of these news items was −4.86 points (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: −4.15–5.57). In 59 cases (57%) the error was attributed to the system, in 27 (21.3%) to health professionals, and in 41 (32.3%) to both. Neither the number of columns (p=0.702), nor the inclusion of a sub-header (p=0.195), nor a complementary image (p=0.9) were found to be related to the effect of the error on safety perceptions. Of the 829 patients, 515 (62.1%; 95%CI: 58.8–65.4%) claimed to have recently seen or heard news about clinical errors in the press, on the radio or on television. The perception of safety decreased when the same person was worried about being the victim of a clinical error and had seen a recent news item about such adverse events (χ2=15.17; p=0.001).ConclusionsEvery week news items about clinical errors are published or broadcast. The way in which newspapers report legal claims over alleged medical errors is similar to the way they report judicial sentences for negligence causing irreparable damage or harm. News about(AU)

Quality of websites in Spanish public hospitals.

The objectives were to assess the quality of websites in Spanish public hospitals by means of a validated system, also including measures of readability and accessibility. A scale was designed and validated to assess the quality (citizen-orientated) of the websites of hospitals. The quality of the of public hospital websites was evaluated by means of the results of the above evaluation scale, analysis of the readability of their contents, and the results of the accessibility test. The validated scale contains 73 elements or attributes. Analysis of the concordance of website evaluations shows average assessment values of between 0.80 and 0.81, which confirms a high degree of agreement among jurors. Twenty per cent of the attributes do not appear on any websites, and 14% are present on all of them. The average mark of the hospitals is 43%. The marks given for readability of tests show that it is satisfactory for 64% hospitals. None of the websites visited fulfilled the requirements necessary to be considered as accessible. The quality of the websites analysed by means of this scale varies from 23% to 62%. Differences in the size or location of the hospitals do not explain this high level of variability. The results suggest that the readability of websites should be improved and that such sites should be accessible to people with disabilities.