Desarrollo de un mapa de riesgos para la tomografía por emisión de positrones / Development of a positron emission tomography risks map

La seguridad del paciente es un componente esencial de la calidad asistencial, especialmente cuando la complejidad de la asistencia ha alcanzado niveles extremos. En la actualidad, conseguir esta seguridad se considera una estrategia básica del sistema nacional de salud. Los servicios de Medicina Nuclear muestran unas particularidades que los hacen especiales en materia de seguridad del paciente, con situaciones que se salen de la práctica asistencial común de los servicios del resto del marco hospitalario. Estas particularidades vienen definidas por el hecho de utilizar en la actividad diaria radiaciones ionizantes, tanto encapsuladas como no encapsuladas. Además, y concretamente en el caso de la tomografía por emisión de positrones (PET), el hecho de realizar la exploración implica de modo indispensable la coordinación de numerosos grupos de profesionales, tanto de la propia unidad de gestión clínica como de otros servicios del hospital (incluso de empresas ajenas al propio hospital y al propio sistema sanitario público). El objetivo del presente trabajo ha sido identificar los riesgos a los que puede exponerse un paciente que va a ser explorado mediante PET en un servicio de Medicina Nuclear y elaborar el mapa de riesgos para el proceso PET. La metodología empleada se enmarca genéricamente en la propuesta por el Ministerio de Sanidad (2007) y su concreción práctica (dada la escasa literatura disponible en Medicina Nuclear) sigue en lo posible lo desarrollado en áreas asistenciales afines (radiodiagnóstico y radioterapia). Para ello, se constituyó un equipo multidisciplinar de profesionales directamente relacionados con el proceso PET, se utilizó la metodología análisis modal de fallos y efectos con la intención de identificar los posibles fallos, sus causas y los potenciales eventos adversos que provocan cada uno de los fallos. Como paso final, se creó el mapa de riesgos, ubicando en cada etapa del proceso los fallos previamente identificados. El presente trabajo expone el proceso PET, el cual ha permitido describir los riesgos que puede correr un paciente cuando es requerido para realizarse una exploración PET, así como los eventos adversos derivados de ellos. Todo ello ha quedado plasmado en un mapa de riesgos del proceso PET

Patient safety is an essential component of quality of care, especially when the complexity of care has reached extreme levels. Currently achieving this safety is considered a basic strategy of the National Health System. Nuclear Medicine departments have certain peculiarities that make them special in terms of patient safety, with situations that go beyond the common healthcare practice of other departments. Namely, that both encapsulated and non-encapsulated ionizing radiation is used in daily practice, and numerous groups of professionals must be coordinated to undertake positron emission tomography (PET) specifically, from the clinical management unit itself, and from other departments of the hospital (as well as companies outside the hospital itself and the Public Health System). The objective of this paper was to identify the risks to which a patient who is to be explored through PET can be exposed in a Nuclear Medicine department and draw up a risk map for the PET process. The methodology used is part of the proposal of the Ministry of Health (2007), and its practical implementation (given the limited literature available on Nuclear Medicine), follows as far as possible that of related care areas (radiodiagnosis and radiotherapy). For this purpose, a multidisciplinary team of professionals directly related to the PET process was created, using the modal analysis of faults and effects methodology to identify possible failures, their causes and the potential adverse events causing each. As a final step, a risk map was created, locating the previously identified faults at each stage of the process. This paper exposes the PET process, and describes the risks that patients might run when a PET scan is required, as well as the adverse events deriving from it. All this is shown in a risk map of the PET process

Development of a positron emission tomography risks map. / Desarrollo de un mapa de riesgos para la tomografía por emisión de positrones.

Patient safety is an essential component of quality of care, especially when the complexity of care has reached extreme levels. Currently achieving this safety is considered a basic strategy of the National Health System. Nuclear Medicine departments have certain peculiarities that make them special in terms of patient safety, with situations that go beyond the common healthcare practice of other departments. Namely, that both encapsulated and non-encapsulated ionizing radiation is used in daily practice, and numerous groups of professionals must be coordinated to undertake positron emission tomography (PET) specifically, from the clinical management unit itself, and from other departments of the hospital (as well as companies outside the hospital itself and the Public Health System). The objective of this paper was to identify the risks to which a patient who is to be explored through PET can be exposed in a Nuclear Medicine department and draw up a risk map for the PET process. The methodology used is part of the proposal of the Ministry of Health (2007), and its practical implementation (given the limited literature available on Nuclear Medicine), follows as far as possible that of related care areas (radiodiagnosis and radiotherapy). For this purpose, a multidisciplinary team of professionals directly related to the PET process was created, using the modal analysis of faults and effects methodology to identify possible failures, their causes and the potential adverse events causing each. As a final step, a risk map was created, locating the previously identified faults at each stage of the process. This paper exposes the PET process, and describes the risks that patients might run when a PET scan is required, as well as the adverse events deriving from it. All this is shown in a risk map of the PET process.

Prevención de eventos adversos para la seguridad del paciente en las unidades de tratamiento del dolor crónico / Prevention of adverse events for patient safety in chronic pain treatment units

Objetivos. Identificar acciones preventivas que minimicen el riesgo para la seguridad de los pacientes atendidos en las unidades de tratamiento del dolor, y agrupar en lotes las acciones preventivas que presenten características homogéneas. El trabajo es una parte de un proyecto de mejora de la seguridad de pacientes atendidos en dichas unidades, cuyo propósito global ha sido la identificación, priorización y prevención de riesgos. Material y métodos. Se seleccionó un grupo de expertos formado por profesionales con formación clínica específica y experiencia en programas y servicios de atención al dolor. Se les proporcionó formación en seguridad de pacientes e información sobre los eventos adversos identificados, los fallos y las causas asociados. Mediante la técnica de tormenta de ideas los participantes respondieron a la pregunta: ¿qué modificaciones o mejoras habría que hacer al proceso asistencial para evitar absolutamente la aparición de cada uno de los eventos adversos? Las propuestas generadas se consensuaron y agruparon en lotes en función de su homogeneidad. Resultados. Se identificaron 456 acciones preventivas. El apartado más numeroso fue el de las modificaciones en la organización del proceso asistencial, seguido de los de las mejoras en la práctica clínica, las actividades formativas, la protocolización y la comunicación con el paciente. Conclusiones. Según el consenso de los expertos, son los cambios organizativos y las mejoras en la práctica asistencial, las intervenciones que más podrían reducir el riesgo para los pacientes en las unidades de tratamiento del dolor(AU)

Objectives. To identify preventive actions that minimise risk of patients safety in pain treatment units, and to cluster preventive actions into homogeneous groups. The current study is part of a project intended to improve patient safety in pain treatment units, and is aimed at identifying, prioritising and preventing patient safety risk. Material and methods. A group of experts was selected from professionals with a specific clinical background and experience in pain treatment units. This group was provided with information on patient safety and on known adverse events, errors and related causes. Through a brainstorming method the participants were asked: What changes or improvements would need to be undertaken to absolutely prevent the occurrence of each adverse event? The participant's proposals were analysed and grouped according to their homogeneity. Results. A total of 456 preventive actions were identified. The group that received the highest number of suggestions was the one including changes in the management of healthcare processes, followed by the group that considered improvements in clinical practice, training activities, protocols and policies, and patient communication. Conclusions. According to the consensus of the experts, management of healthcare processes and improvements in health care practices are the 2 interventions that are most likely to reduce patient safety risk in pain treatment units(AU)

[Prevention of adverse events for patient safety in chronic pain treatment units]. / Prevención de eventos adversos para la seguridad del paciente en las unidades de tratamiento del dolor crónico.

OBJECTIVES: To identify preventive actions that minimise risk of patients safety in pain treatment units, and to cluster preventive actions into homogeneous groups. The current study is part of a project intended to improve patient safety in pain treatment units, and is aimed at identifying, prioritising and preventing patient safety risk. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A group of experts was selected from professionals with a specific clinical background and experience in pain treatment units. This group was provided with information on patient safety and on known adverse events, errors and related causes. Through a brainstorming method the participants were asked: What changes or improvements would need to be undertaken to absolutely prevent the occurrence of each adverse event? The participant's proposals were analysed and grouped according to their homogeneity. RESULTS: A total of 456 preventive actions were identified. The group that received the highest number of suggestions was the one including changes in the management of healthcare processes, followed by the group that considered improvements in clinical practice, training activities, protocols and policies, and patient communication. CONCLUSIONS: According to the consensus of the experts, management of healthcare processes and improvements in health care practices are the 2 interventions that are most likely to reduce patient safety risk in pain treatment units.

Identificación y priorización de episodios adversos y fallos relacionados con la seguridad del paciente en las Unidades de Tratamiento del Dolor / Identifying and prioritising adverse episodes and failures related to patient safety in Pain Treatment Units

Objetivos. Un grupo de expertos coordinado por la Escuela Andaluza de Salud Pública identificó los episodios adversos (EA) más graves y frecuentes en las Unidades de Tratamiento del Dolor (UTD), así como los fallos y las causas subyacentes, como paso previo a la elaboración de acciones preventivas. Los objetivos del proyecto fueron identificar los episodios adversos potenciales en las UTD, identificar sus fallos y las causas que pueden originarlos y, priorizar dichos fallos según la herramienta análisis de modos de fallos y de sus efectos (AMFE). Material y métodos. La metodología empleada consistió en realizar una búsqueda bibliográfica, selección de un grupo de expertos con experiencia en UTD, creación de un catálogo de episodios adversos mediante la técnica de generación de ideas y, puesta en práctica de las herramientas AMFE e índice de prioridad de riesgo. Resultados. Se identificaron hasta 66 tipos de episodios adversos relacionados con medicación (30), técnicas invasivas (15), proceso asistencial (10), información y educación del paciente (6), práctica clínica (5). Se localizó que hasta 101 fallos pueden desencadenar esos EA y, que 242 causas pueden provocar esos fallos. Conclusiones. Los resultados indican la necesidad de trabajar principalmente en 2 sentidos: la mejora del proceso asistencial en las UTD (la organización de la asistencia), y el trabajo profesional; este último en 2 aspectos, mejora de la práctica clínica y aumento de las competencias profesionales mediante formación específica. La comunicación, ya sea interprofesional o interservicios o con el paciente y su familia, se identifica como un aspecto clave para la mejora(AU)

Objectives. An expert group coordinated by the Andalusian School of Public Health identified the most serious and frequent adverse events in Pain Treatment Units (PTU), as well the failures and underlying causes, as a prior step to preparing preventive actions. The aims of the project were to identify potential adverse events in Pain Treatment Units, identify failures and their underlying causes, and prioritise these failures according to a failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) tool. Material and methods. The method employed consisted of a literature search, the selection of an expert group with experience in PTU, creating a catalogue of adverse events using the generation of ideas technique, and putting the FMEA and Risk Priority Index tools into practice. Results. Up to 66 types of adverse events were identified associated with; medication (30), invasive techniques (15), care process (10), patient information and education (6), and clinical practice (5). It was found that up to 101 failures could be triggered by these adverse events, and that 242 causes could lead to these failures. Conclusions. The results indicated the need to work principally in two directions, improving the care process in the PTU (the health care organisation), and the professional work, this latter having two aspects, improving the clinical practice, and increase professional skills by means of specific training. Communication, whether inter-professional or inter-department, or with the patient and their family, is identified as a key aspect for improvement(AU)

[Identifying and prioritising adverse episodes and failures related to patient safety in Pain Treatment Units]. / Identificación y priorización de episodios adversos y fallos relacionados con la seguridad del paciente en las Unidades de Tratamiento del Dolor.

OBJECTIVES: An expert group coordinated by the Andalusian School of Public Health identified the most serious and frequent adverse events in Pain Treatment Units (PTU), as well the failures and underlying causes, as a prior step to preparing preventive actions. The aims of the project were to identify potential adverse events in Pain Treatment Units, identify failures and their underlying causes, and prioritise these failures according to a failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) tool. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The method employed consisted of a literature search, the selection of an expert group with experience in PTU, creating a catalogue of adverse events using the generation of ideas technique, and putting the FMEA and Risk Priority Index tools into practice. RESULTS: Up to 66 types of adverse events were identified associated with; medication (30), invasive techniques (15), care process (10), patient information and education (6), and clinical practice (5). It was found that up to 101 failures could be triggered by these adverse events, and that 242 causes could lead to these failures. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated the need to work principally in two directions, improving the care process in the PTU (the health care organisation), and the professional work, this latter having two aspects, improving the clinical practice, and increase professional skills by means of specific training. Communication, whether inter-professional or inter-department, or with the patient and their family, is identified as a key aspect for improvement.

Atención urgente. Estudio de la situación y propuestas de futuro / Emergency care: situation study and future proposals

La situación que atraviesan los Servicios de Urgencias y Emergencias en el entorno occidental llevó a la Sociedad Española de Medicina de Urgencias a promover un estudio realizado con la Escuela Andaluza de Salud Pública. El análisis de la atención urgente en España aporta, a partir de los protagonistas de la asistencia (administraciones, responsables, profesionales, usuarios) alternativas de mejora en este área de atención sanitaria. Se han considerado los siguientes aspectos estratégicos: el papel de las urgencias en el sistema sanitario, la estructura y gestión de los servicios, el desarrollo de los profesionales de la atención urgente y calidad y acreditación de los servicios de urgencias (AU)

[Life style and level of health education in housewives from a neighborhood of Granada]. / Estilo de vida y nivel de educación sanitaria en amas de casa de un barrio de Granada capital.

In the present study some aspects of the health education level and life style of the housewives of a district of Granada were evaluated. The sample was randomly selected between the dwellings in that area. The participation rate was 60%. The survey was carried out by personal and direct interview by a female interviewer. The mean educational level was lower than high school in 97.5%. Mean age was 47 years. 13.3% of them were smokers, and 21.7% drank alcohol regularly. Only 44.1% of those in child bearing age used some contraceptive method; intrauterine devices were not used by anyone of them. Maternal lactation showed an increasing trend with age, but without statistical significance. 28.3% of women were unaware of the services of early diagnosis of genital cancer, and a similar rate ignored the preventive self-examination of the breast. The major conclusions of the study were that the educational level is directly related with the performance of beneficial health habits, and that the activities directed to health education should be promoted in the target population.