Addressing Acute Stress among Professionals Caring for COVID-19 Patients: Lessons Learned during the First Outbreak in Spain (March-April 2020).

Objectives: To describe lessons learned during the first COVID-19 outbreak in developing urgent interventions to strengthen healthcare workers' capacity to cope with acute stress caused by health care pressure, concern about becoming infected, despair of witnessing patients' suffering, and critical decision-making requirements of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic during the first outbreak in Spain. Methods: A task force integrated by healthcare professionals and academics was activated following the first observations of acute stress reactions starting to compromise the professionals' capacity for caring COVID-19 patients. Literature review and qualitative approach (consensus techniques) were applied. The target population included health professionals in primary care, hospitals, emergencies, and nursing homes. Interventions designed for addressing acute stress were agreed and disseminated. Findings: There are similarities in stressors to previous outbreaks, and the solutions devised then may work now. A set of issues, interventions to cope with, and their levels of evidence were defined. Issues and interventions were classified as: adequate communication initiative to strengthen work morale (avoiding information blackouts, uniformity of criteria, access to updated information, mentoring new professionals); resilience and recovery from physical and mental fatigue (briefings, protecting the family, regulated recovery time during the day, psychological first aid, humanizing care); reinforce leadership of intermediate commands (informative leadership, transparency, realism, and positive messages, the current state of emergency has not allowed for an empirical analysis of the effectiveness of proposed interventions. Sharing information to gauge expectations, listening to what professionals need, feeling protected from threats, organizational flexibility, encouraging teamwork, and leadership that promotes psychological safety have led to more positive responses. Attention to the needs of individuals must be combined with caring for the teams responsible for patient care. Conclusions: Although the COVID-19 pandemic has a more devastating effect than other recent outbreaks, there are common stressors and lessons learned in all of them that we must draw on to increase our capacity to respond to future healthcare crises.

Emergence and Spread of B.1.1.7 Lineage in Primary Care and Clinical Impact in the Morbi-Mortality among Hospitalized Patients in Madrid, Spain.

In December 2020, UK authorities warned of the rapid spread of a new SARS-CoV-2 variant, belonging to the B.1.1.7 lineage, known as the Alpha variant. This variant is characterized by 17 mutations and 3 deletions. The deletion 69-70 in the spike protein can be detected by commercial platforms, allowing its real-time spread to be known. From the last days of December 2020 and over 4 months, all respiratory samples with a positive result for SARS-CoV-2 from patients treated in primary care and the emergency department were screened to detect this variant based on the strategy S gene target failure (SGTF). The first cases were detected during week 53 (2020) and reached >90% of all cases during weeks 15-16 (2021). During this period, the B.1.1.7/SGTF variant spread at a rapid and constant replacement rate of around 30-36%. The probability of intensive care unit admission was twice higher among patients infected by the B.1.1.7/SGTF variant, but there were no differences in death rate. During the peak of the third pandemic wave, this variant was not the most prevalent, and it became dominant when this wave was declining. Our results confirm that the B.1.1.7/SGTF variant displaced other SARS-CoV-2 variants in our healthcare area in 4 months. This displacement has led to an increase in the burden of disease.

Dejar de hacer lo que no aporta valor en la Era COVID-19 / No disponible

No disponible

How Much of Root Cause Analysis Translates into Improved Patient Safety: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review was to consolidate studies to determine whether root cause analysis (RCA) is an adequate method to decrease recurrence of avoidable adverse events (AAEs). METHODS: A systematic search of databases from creation until December 2018 was performed using PubMed, Scopus and EMBASE. We included articles published in scientific journals describing the practical usefulness in and impact of RCA on the reduction of AAEs and whether professionals consider it feasible. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to assess the quality of studies. RESULTS: Twenty-one articles met the inclusion criteria. Samples included in these studies ranged from 20 to 1,707 analyses of RCAs, AAEs, recommendations, audits or interviews with professionals. The most common setting was hospitals (86%; n = 18), and the type of incident most analysed was AAEs, in 71% (n = 15) of the cases; 47% (n = 10) of the studies stated that the main weakness of RCA is its recommendations. The most common causes involved in the occurrence of AEs were communication problems among professionals, human error and faults in the organisation of the health care process. Despite the widespread implementation of RCA in the past decades, only 2 studies could to some extent establish an improvement in patient safety due to RCAs. CONCLUSIONS: RCA is a useful tool for the identification of the remote and immediate causes of safety incidents, but not for implementing effective measures to prevent their recurrence.

Low-value clinical practices and harm caused by non-adherence to 'do not do' recommendations in primary care in Spain: a Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the non-adherence to the primary care 'do not do' recommendations (DNDs) and their likelihood to cause harm. DESIGN: Delphi study. SETTING: Spanish National Health System. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 128 professionals were recruited (50 general practitioners [GPs], 28 pediatricians [PEDs], 31 nurses who care for adult patients [RNs] and 19 pediatric nurses [PNs]). INTERVENTIONS: A selection of 27 DNDs directed at GPs, 8 at PEDs, 9 at RNs and 4 at PNs were included in the Delphi technique. A 10-point scale was used to assess whether a given practice was still present and the likelihood of it causing of an adverse event. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Impact calculated by multiplying an event's frequency and likelihood to cause harm. RESULTS: A total of 100 professionals responded to wave 1 (78% response rate) and 97 of them to wave 2 (97% response rate). In all, 22% (6/27) of the practices for GPs, 12% (1/8) for PEDs, 33% (3/9) for RNs and none for PNs were cataloged as frequent. A total of 37% (10/27) of these practices for GPs, 25% (2/8) for PEDs, 33% (3/9) for RNs and 25% (1/4) for PNs were considered as potential causes of harm. Only 26% (7/27) of the DNDs for GPs showed scores equal to or higher than 36 points. The impact measure was higher for ordering benzodiazepines to treat insomnia, agitation or delirium in elderly patients (mean = 57.8, SD = 25.3). CONCLUSIONS: Low-value and potentially dangerous practices were identified; avoiding these could improve care quality.

E-learning on risk management. An opportunity for sharing knowledge and experiences in patient safety.

QUALITY PROBLEM: E-learning methodology is a good alternative to more traditional methods when economical restrictions and geographical dispersion are important. However, there is still little knowledge about its utility in the development of patient safety (PS) improvement projects. INITIAL ASSESSMENT: Evaluation of the acceptability and utility of an e-learning risk management (RM) course for healthcare professionals to develop PS improvement projects in different clinical settings. CHOICE OF SOLUTION: E-course offered, in Spanish and English, to facilitate the design of PS improvement projects using RM tools under the continuous support of PS experts. IMPLEMENTATION: The evaluation of the course was based on the reaction, learning and healthcare professional behavior. A free online database was created to disseminate and share the projects developed during the course. EVALUATION: A total of 1426 professionals have completed the course (84.2%), of which 86.7% (1236) were from Spain, 8.3% (118) from Latin America and 5% (72) from other European and Eastern Mediterranean countries. More than 80% of the students were very satisfied with the e-course and 98% would recommend it to their colleagues. Learning and developing improvement projects through teamwork was highlighted as a very positive aspect. A total of 70.3% of the 387 PSIP were developed in hospitals. The most frequent topic was medication. LESSON LEARNED: Team learning based on real cases was one of the most positive aspects of the e-course. The improvement projects developed are transferable examples of good practices that facilitate the application of RM tools in different clinical settings.

A Spanish-language patient safety questionnaire to measure medical and nursing students' attitudes and knowledge.

OBJECTIVE: To design and validate a questionnaire for assessing attitudes and knowledge about patient safety using a sample of medical and nursing students undergoing clinical training in Spain and four countries in Latin America. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, a literature review was carried out and total of 786 medical and nursing students were surveyed at eight universities from five countries (Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Spain) to develop and refine a Spanish-language questionnaire on knowledge and attitudes about patient safety. The scope of the questionnaire was based on five dimensions (factors) presented in studies related to patient safety culture found in PubMed and Scopus. Based on the five factors, 25 reactive items were developed. Composite reliability indexes and Cronbach's alpha statistics were estimated for each factor, and confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to assess validity. After a pilot test, the questionnaire was refined using confirmatory models, maximum-likelihood estimation, and the variance-covariance matrix (as input). Multiple linear regression models were used to confirm external validity, considering variables related to patient safety culture as dependent variables and the five factors as independent variables. RESULTS: The final instrument was a structured five-point Likert self-administered survey (the "Latino Student Patient Safety Questionnaire") consisting of 21 items grouped into five factors. Compound reliability indexes (Cronbach's alpha statistic) calculated for the five factors were about 0.7 or higher. The results of the multiple linear regression analyses indicated good model fit (goodness-of-fit index: 0.9). Item-total correlations were higher than 0.3 in all cases. The convergent-discriminant validity was adequate. CONCLUSIONS: The questionnaire designed and validated in this study assesses nursing and medical students' attitudes and knowledge about patient safety. This instrument could be used to indirectly evaluate whether or not students in health disciplines are acquiring and thus likely to put into practice the professional skills currently considered most appropriate for patient safety.

A Spanish-language patient safety questionnaire to measure medical and nursing students' attitudes and knowledge / Un cuestionario en espanol sobre seguridad del paciente para medir las actitudes y los conocimientos de los estudiantes de medicina y enfermería

OBJECTIVE: To design and validate a questionnaire for assessing attitudes and knowledge about patient safety using a sample of medical and nursing students undergoing clinical training in Spain and four countries in Latin America. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, a literature review was carried out and total of 786 medical and nursing students were surveyed at eight universities from five countries (Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Spain) to develop and refine a Spanish-language questionnaire on knowledge and attitudes about patient safety. The scope of the questionnaire was based on five dimensions (factors) presented in studies related to patient safety culture found in PubMed and Scopus. Based on the five factors, 25 reactive items were developed. Composite reliability indexes and Cronbach's alpha statistics were estimatedfor each factor, and confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to assess validity. After a pilot test, the questionnaire was refined using confirmatory models, maximum-likelihood estimation, and the variance-covariance matrix (as input). Multiple linear regression models were used to confirm external validity, considering variables related to patient safety culture as dependent variables and the five factors as independent variables. RESULTS: The final instrument was a structured five-point Likert self-administered survey (the "Latino Student Patient Safety Questionnaire") consisting of 21 items grouped into five factors. Compound reliability indexes (Cronbach's alpha statistic) calculated for the five factors were about 0.7 or higher. The results of the multiple linear regression analyses indicated good model fit (goodness-of-fit index: 0.9). Item-total correlations were higher than 0.3 in all cases. The convergent-discriminant validity was adequate. CONCLUSIONS: The questionnaire designed and validated in this study assesses nursing and medical students' attitudes and knowledge about patient safety. This instrument could be used to indirectly evaluate whether or not students in health disciplines are acquiring and thus likely to put into practice the professional skills currently considered most appropriate for patient safety.

OBJETIVO: Diseñar y validar un cuestionario de evaluación de las actitudes y los conocimientos en materia de seguridad del paciente con una muestra de estudiantes de medicina y enfermería que reciben formación médica en Espana y en cuatro países de América Latina. MÉTODOS: En este estudio transversal se llevó a cabo una revisión bibliográfica y se encuestó a un total de 786 estudiantes de medicina y enfermería de ocho universidades de cinco países (Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, Espana y Guatemala) con objeto de elaborar y corregir un cuestionario en espanol sobre conocimientos y actitudes en materia de seguridad del paciente. El ámbito del cuestionario se basó en cinco dimensiones (factores) presentadas en estudios relacionados con la cultura de la seguridad del paciente encontrados en PubMed y Scopus. Con base en los cinco factores, se elaboraron 25 ítems reactivos. Se calcularon los índices de fiabilidad compuesta y alfa de Cronbach para cada factor, y se realizó un análisis factorial confirmatorio para evaluar la validez. Tras una prueba piloto se corrigió el cuestionario mediante modelos confirmatorios, el cálculo de la máxima probabilidad y la matriz de variancia-covariancia (como insumo). Se utilizaron modelos de regresión lineal múltiple para confirmar la validez externa, considerando las variables relacionadas con la cultura de seguridad del paciente como variables dependientes y los cinco factores como variables independientes. RESULTADOS: El instrumento final fue una encuesta autoadministrada mediante escala de Likert estructurada en cinco puntos ("Cuestionario de Seguridad del Paciente para Estudiantes Latinos"), que consta de 21 ítems agrupados en cinco factores. Los índices de fiabilidad compuesta (prueba estadística de alfa de Cronbach) calculados para los cinco factores fueron aproximadamente de 0,7 o superiores. Los resultados de los análisis de regresión lineal múltiple indicaron un buen ajuste del modelo (índice de bondad de ajuste: 0,9). Las correlaciones ítem-total fueron superiores a 0,3 en todos los casos. La validez convergente y discriminatoria fue adecuada. CONCLUSIONES: El cuestionario disenado y validado en este estudio evalúa las actitudes y los conocimientos de los estudiantes de enfermería y medicina en materia de seguridad del paciente. Este instrumento podría utilizarse para evaluar indirectamente si los estudiantes de disciplinas de la salud están adquiriendo, y por lo tanto, es probable que pongan en práctica, las habilidades profesionales consideradas actualmente como más apropiadas para la seguridad del paciente.

Patient safety and adverse events related with obstetric care.

PURPOSE: To determine the frequency and distribution of Adverse Events (AE) in obstetrics departments at Spanish hospitals. METHODS: We present a retrospective cohort study including 816 women admitted to the obstetrics departments at 41 hospitals that took part in the National Adverse Effects Study in Spain (ENEAS) and an extension of this study in all hospitals located in two Autonomous Regions. To identify AE, nurses from each participating hospital examined all medical records, and completed a validated screening guide. A team of external reviewers evaluated the medical records of all women who met at least one of the criteria in the screening guide to verify all AE. The main outcome measure was the incidence of AE during hospitalization. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of patients with obstetric care-related AE was 3.6% (95% CI 2.3-4.8). The most frequent AE were those related with surgical interventions or procedures (59.4%). None of the AE detected were considered severe. 36.7% of the AE lengthened the woman's hospital stay, and 13.3% led to hospital admission. Additional procedures were needed after 71.9% of the AE, and additional treatment was needed after 59.4%. 56.3% of the AE were considered preventable. CONCLUSIONS: Obstetric care is characterized by generally younger ages among patients, their low frequency of comorbidities and high expectations for successful outcomes of care. However, some factors can increase obstetric risk and favor the appearance of preventable incidents and AE. Systems are needed to detect preventable AE, and measures are needed to reduce risks or attenuate their consequences.

Que hacen y que deben hacer los pacientes diabeticos para evitar errores con el tratamiento ? / What do diabetic patients and what should they do to avoid errors in the course of treatment?

Objetivo: Describir que hacen los pacientes diabeticos para evitar errores con el tratamiento y presentar consejos para incrementar la seguridad. Metodos Estudio descriptivo de conductas de pacientes diabeticos tratados con insulina para minimizar errores y de consejos de los profesionales para mejorar la seguridad. Se reclutaron aleatoriamente 99 pacientes de 3 centros de salud y 2 hospitales. Adicionalmente, se conto con una muestra de oportunidad de 33 medicos y enfermeros. Resultados Informar de todas las prescripciones (p=0,005), revisar dudas antes de la consulta (p=0,009) y el cumplimiento de la dieta (p=0,02) fueron las unicas precauciones informadas por los pacientes que se relacionaron con un menor numero de errores de los propios pacientes. Las mujeres siguen mejor en casa las indicaciones sobre los controles de glucemia (odds ratio 0,07, intervalo de confianza [IC] del 95%: 0,1-0,6) y recurren a pastilleros para evitar errores (odds ratio: 0,23; IC 95%: 0,1-0,6) con mas frecuencia que los hombres. La informacion de alergias es mas frecuente entre varones (odds ratio: 5,03; IC 95%: 1,4-17,5). Los pacientes con un curso mas prolongado tienden a no proporcionar informacion a su medico sobre otros (..) (AU)

Objective: To report the precautions taken by diabetic patients to avoid treatment errors and to provide advice to increase their safety. Methods: A descriptive study of patients' behaviors to minimize errors and tips by professionals to improve safety. Ninety-nine insulin-treated patients were randomly recruited from 3 primary healthcare centers and 2 hospitals. An opportunity sample of 33 doctors and nurses was also surveyed. Results: Information of all prescriptions (p = 0.005),review of doubts before the visit(p = 0,009),and diet adherence (p = 0.02) were the only precautions reported by patients that related to a lower number of patient errors. Female patients better follow at home instructions for blood glucose monitoring (odds ratio 0.07; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.1-0.6) and use pillboxes to avoid errors (odds ratio 0.23; 95% CI 0.1-0.6) more frequently than male patients. Male patients more commonly carry with them a card with information about allergies (odds ratio 5.03; 95%CI 1.4-17.5). Patients with a longer course of disease tend to withhold information about other treatments from their doctors ( -15.8; 95% CI -23.2-8.4). For healthcare professionals, safety may increase if patients: play a more active role in their treatment (91%), and inform their doctors about their different treatments (88%).Conclusions: Promotion of patient autonomy, improved communication to patients, and systematic information about the most common medication errors may contribute to patient safety (AU)

[What do diabetic patients and what should they do to avoid errors in the course of treatment?]. / ¿Qué hacen y qué deben hacer los pacientes diabéticos para evitar errores con el tratamiento?

OBJECTIVE: To report the precautions taken by diabetic patients to avoid treatment errors and to provide advice to increase their safety. METHODS: A descriptive study of patients' behaviors to minimize errors and tips by professionals to improve safety. Ninety-nine insulin-treated patients were randomly recruited from 3 primary healthcare centers and 2 hospitals. An opportunity sample of 33 doctors and nurses was also surveyed. RESULTS: Information of all prescriptions (p = 0.005), review of doubts before the visit (p = 0,009), and diet adherence (p = 0.02) were the only precautions reported by patients that related to a lower number of patient errors. Female patients better follow at home instructions for blood glucose monitoring (odds ratio 0.07; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.1-0.6) and use pillboxes to avoid errors (odds ratio 0.23; 95% CI 0.1-0.6) more frequently than male patients. Male patients more commonly carry with them a card with information about allergies (odds ratio 5.03; 95% CI 1.4-17.5). Patients with a longer course of disease tend to withhold information about other treatments from their doctors (ß -15.8; 95% CI -23.2-8.4). For healthcare professionals, safety may increase if patients: play a more active role in their treatment (91%), and inform their doctors about their different treatments (88%). CONCLUSIONS: Promotion of patient autonomy, improved communication to patients, and systematic information about the most common medication errors may contribute to patient safety.

[Frequency of medication errors by patients]. / Frecuencia de errores de los pacientes con su medicación.

OBJECTIVE: Analyze the frequency of medication errors committed and reported by patients. METHODS: Descriptive study based on a telephone survey of a random sample of adult patients from the primary care level of the Spanish public health care system. A total of 1 247 patients responded (75% response rate); 63% were women and 29% were older than 70 years. RESULTS: While 37 patients (3%, 95% CI: 2-4) experienced complications associated with medication in the course of treatment, 241 (19.4%, 95% CI: 17-21) reported having made some mistake with their medication. A shorter consultation time (P < 0.01) and a worse assessment of the information provided by the physician (P < 0.01) were associated with the fact that during pharmacy dispensing the patient was told that the prescribed treatment was not appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to the known risks of an adverse event due to a health intervention resulting from a system or practitioner error, there are risks associated with patient errors in the self-administration of medication. Patients who were unsatisfied with the information provided by the physician reported a greater number of errors.

Frecuencia de errores de los pacientes con su medicación / Frequency of medication errors by patients

OBJETIVO: Analizar la frecuencia de errores de medicación que son cometidos e informados por los pacientes. MÉTODOS: Estudio descriptivo basado en encuestas telefónicas a una muestra aleatoria de pacientes adultos del nivel primario de salud del sistema público español. Respondieron un total de 1 247 pacientes (tasa de respuesta, 75 por ciento). El 63 por ciento eran mujeres y 29 por ciento eran mayores de 70 años. RESULTADOS: Mientras 37 pacientes (3 por ciento, IC 95 por ciento: 2-4) sufrieron complicaciones asociadas a la medicación en el curso del tratamiento, 241 (19,4 por ciento, IC 95 por ciento: 17-21) informaron haber cometido algún error con la medicación. Un menor tiempo de consulta (P < 0,01) y una peor valoración de la información proporcionada por el médico (P < 0,01) se asociaron al hecho de que en la dispensación en la farmacia le indicaran al paciente que el tratamiento prescrito no era apropiado. CONCLUSIONES: A los riesgos conocidos de sufrir un evento adverso, fruto de la intervención sanitaria por error del sistema o del profesional, hay que sumar los asociados a los errores de los pacientes en la autoadministración de la medicación. Los pacientes insatisfechos con la información proporcionada por el médico informaron un mayor número de errores.

OBJECTIVE: Analyze the frequency of medication errors committed and reported by patients. METHODS: Descriptive study based on a telephone survey of a random sample of adult patients from the primary care level of the Spanish public health care system. A total of 1 247 patients responded (75 percent response rate); 63 percent were women and 29 percent were older than 70 years. RESULTS: While 37 patients (3 percent, 95 percent CI: 2-4) experienced complications associated with medication in the course of treatment, 241 (19.4 percent, 95 percent CI: 17-21) reported having made some mistake with their medication. A shorter consultation time (P < 0.01) and a worse assessment of the information provided by the physician (P < 0.01) were associated with the fact that during pharmacy dispensing the patient was told that the prescribed treatment was not appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to the known risks of an adverse event due to a health intervention resulting from a system or practitioner error, there are risks associated with patient errors in the self-administration of medication. Patients who were unsatisfied with the information provided by the physician reported a greater number of errors.

La cultura de seguridad del paciente: del pasado al futuro en cuatro tiempos / No disponible

No disponible

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)

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

OBJECTIVE: To analyze how news items about clinical errors are treated by the press in Spain and their influence on patients. METHODS: We 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. RESULTS: We 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 (chi(2)=15.17; p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Every 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 errors generates insecurity in patients. It is advisable to create interfaces between journalists and health professionals.

Unexpected findings at imaging: predicting frequency in various types of studies.

OBJECTIVE: : The objective was to evaluate the prevalence and associated variables of unsuspected findings from imaging tests in clinical practice. MATERIAL AND METHODS: : Cross-sectional study of patients referred for an imaging test in 2006. Two independent radiologists classified the imaging tests according to the presence or absence of an unexpected finding in relation with the causes that prompted the test (kappa=0.95). A thorough chart review of these patients was carried out as a quality control. RESULTS: : Out of 3259 patients in the study, 488 revealed unsuspected findings (15.0%). The prevalence of abnormal findings varied according to age: from 20.4% (150/734) in the over 74-group to 9.0% (76/847) in the under 43-group. The largest prevalence was in the category of infectious diseases (14/49, 28.6%) and in CT (260/901, 28.9%) and ultrasound (138/668, 20.7%). Studies showing moderate clinical information on the referral form were less likely to show unexpected findings than those with null or minor information (OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.36-0.73). CONCLUSION: : Clinicians should expect the frequency of diseases detectable by imaging to increase in the future. Further research with follow-up of these findings is needed to estimate the effect of imaging technologies on final health outcomes.