Higher incidence of adverse events in isolated patients compared with non-isolated patients: a cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether isolated patients admitted to hospital have a higher incidence of adverse events (AEs), to identify their nature, impact and preventability. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study with isolated and non-isolated patients. SETTING: One public university hospital in the Valencian Community (southeast Spain). PARTICIPANTS: We consecutively collected 400 patients, 200 isolated and 200 non-isolated, age ≥18 years old, to match according to date of entry, admission department, sex, age (±5 years) and disease severity from April 2017 to October 2018. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: patients age <18 years old and/or reverse isolation patients. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome as the AE, defined according to the National Study of Adverse Effects linked to Hospitalisation (Estudio Nacional Sobre los Efectos Adversos) criteria. Cumulative incidence rates and AE incidence density rates were calculated. RESULTS: The incidence of isolated patients with AEs 16.5% (95% CI 11.4% to 21.6%) compared with 9.5% (95% CI 5.4% to 13.6%) in non-isolated (p<0.03). The incidence density of patients with AEs among isolated patients was 11.8 per 1000 days/patient (95% CI 7.8 to 15.9) compared with 4.3 per 1000 days/patient (95% CI 2.4 to 6.3) among non-isolated patients (p<0.001). The incidence of AEs among isolated patients was 18.5% compared with 11% for non-isolated patients (p<0.09). Among the 37 AEs detected in 33 isolated patients, and the 22 AEs detected in 19 non-isolated patients, most corresponded to healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) for both isolated and non-isolated patients (48.6% vs 45.4%). There were significant differences with respect to the preventability of AEs, (67.6% among isolated patients compared with 52.6% among non-isolated patients). CONCLUSIONS: AEs were significantly higher in isolated patients compared with non-isolated patients, more than half being preventable and with HAIs as the primary cause. It is essential to improve training and the safety culture of healthcare professionals relating to the care provided to this type of patient.

The effect of intimate partner violence and other forms of violence against women on health.

BACKGROUND: There are many studies concerning the health consequences of intimate partner violence (IPV). However, little research has been done on the health consequences of other forms of violence against women (VAW) such as the violence perpetrated by male relatives, friends or strangers. The aims of this paper were: (i) to analyze the prevalence of different forms of VAW perpetrated by males at home, workplace and other social environments in Spain and (ii) to analyze whether IPV and other forms of VAW have a different or similar negative impact on women's health. METHODS: A sample of 13 094 women interviewed in the Spanish National Health Survey 2006 was included. Outcomes were physical and mental health indicators. Predictor variables were IPV and other VAW forms. Logistic regression models were fitted. RESULTS: The likelihood of coronary heart disease [OR: 5.28 (1.45-19.25)], chronic neck [OR: 2.01 (1.35-2.97)] and back pain [OR: 2.34 (1.53-3.57)] was higher among women who reported IPV than among those who did not. Similar associations were found in the case of women affected by other forms of VAW. Mental health problems, with the exception of psychotropic drug use, were more frequent and more strongly associated with IPV than with other forms of VAW. CONCLUSION: There are health inequities between battered and non-battered women, which may be related to exposure to not only IPV but also other forms of VAW.

[Adverse events in ambulatory surgical procedures]. / Efectos adversos en cirugía mayor ambulatoria.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the incidence of adverse events and patients with adverse events in ambulatory surgical procedures and to compare it with that of other studies. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Historical cohort study. The scope of the study was the ambulatory surgical procedures unit of a university hospital. All general surgery department patients seen in this unit during the year 2005 were included. RESULTS: The incidence of patients with adverse events directly related to hospital care was of 3% (95% CI, 0.9-5). Of the adverse events identified 5 were considered slight, 3 moderate and none were considered serious. All the moderate ones were considered unavoidable and of slight, only the one was avoidable. Six of the adverse events were associated to a procedure, one due to hospital infections and one with other causes. There was an increase in hospital stay due to 75% of the adverse events, and 25% of them affected admission. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of adverse events related to medical care in the Spanish hospitals is similar to those found in the studies carried out in American and European countries using the same methodology. The surgical area is considered a high risk unit. However, ambulatory surgical procedures reduce these risks, in such a way that the incidence is far below that of surgery department. Therefore, besides improving the technical efficiency of the clinical services, it is safer for the patients.

Efectos adversos en cirugía mayor ambulatoria / Adverse events in ambulatory surgical procedures

Objetivo. Determinar la incidencia de efectos adversos y de pacientes con efectos adversos en cirugía mayor ambulatoria y compararla con la incidencia encontrada en los servicios de cirugía general incluidos en el estudio ENEAS. Material y método. Estudio de cohortes históricas. El ámbito del estudio fue la unidad de cirugía mayor ambulatoria de un hospital universitario. Se incluyó a todos los pacientes atendidos en el servicio de cirugía general durante el año 2005. Resultados. La incidencia de pacientes con efectos adversos relacionados directamente con la asistencia sanitaria fue del 3% (intervalo de confianza del95%, 0,9-5). De los 8 efectos adversos detectados, 5se consideraron leves, 3 moderados y ninguno grave. Todos los moderados se consideraron inevitables y de los leves tan sólo uno era evitable. Entre los efectos adversos, 6 tuvieron relación con un procedimiento, uno con infección nosocomial y otro con otras causas. Tres cuartas partes de los efectos adversos tuvieron como consecuencia un incremento de la estancia y en una cuarta parte el efecto adverso condicionó el ingreso. Conclusiones. La incidencia de efectos adversos relacionados con la asistencia sanitaria en los hospitales españoles es similar a la de los estudios realizados en países americanos y europeos con similar metodología. Se considera que el área quirúrgica es de alto riesgo para desencadenarlos; sin embargo, la cirugía mayor ambulatoria reduce su incidencia. Por lo tanto, además de mejorar la eficiencia técnica de los servicios clínicos, es más segura para los pacientes (AU)

Objective. To assess the incidence of adverse events and patients with adverse events in ambulatory surgical procedures and to compare it with that of other studies. Material and method. Historical cohort study. The scope of the study was the ambulatory surgical procedures unit of a university hospital. All general surgery department patients seen in this unit during the year 2005 were included. Results. The incidence of patients with adverse events directly related to hospital care was of 3% (95% CI, 0.9-5). Of the adverse events identified 5 were considered slight, 3 moderate and none were considered serious. All the moderate ones were considered unavoidable and of slight, only the one was avoidable. Six of the adverse events were associated to a procedure, one due to hospital infections an done with other causes. There was an increase in hospital stay due to 75% of the adverse events, and 25%of them affected admission. Conclusions. The incidence of adverse events related to medical care in the Spanish hospitals is similar to those found in the studies carried out in American and European countries using the same methodology. The surgical area is considered a high risk unit. However, ambulatory surgical procedures reduce these risks, in such a way that the incidence is far below that of surgery department. Therefore, besides improving the technical efficiency of the clinical services, itis safer for the patients (AU)