Journal of Healthcare Quality Research最新文献

Introduction and objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Background and objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Aim

Material and method

Results

Conclusion

Purpose

Method

Results

Conclusions

Objective

Material and method

Results

Conclusions

Introduction

There is a lack of data about adverse events (AE) in intermediate and long-term care centers (ILCC). We aimed to synthesize the available scientific evidence on instruments used to identify and characterize AEs. We also aimed to describe the most common adverse events in ILCCs.

Material and methods

A narrative systematic review of the literature was conducted according to Prisma recommendations. The PubMed database was searched for articles published between 2000 and 2021. Two reviewers independently screened and reviewed the studies through blind and independent review. We evaluated bias risk with Cochrane's risk of bias tool. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Discrepancies that were not resolved by discussion were discussed with a third reviewer. Descriptive data was extracted and qualitative content analysis was performed.

Results

We found 2191 articles. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 272 papers were screened by title and abstract, and 66 studies were selected for full review. The instruments used to identify AEs were mostly tools to identify specific AEs or risks of AEs (94%), the remaining 6% were multidimensional. The most frequent categories detected medication-related AEs (n = 26, 40%); falls (n = 7, 11%); psychiatric AEs (6.9%); malnutrition (4.6%), and infections (4.6%). The studies that used multidimensional tools refer to frailty, dependency, or lack of energy as predictors of AEs. However, they do not take into account the importance of detecting AEs. We found 2–11 adverse drug events (ADE) per resident/month. We found a prevalence of falls (12.5%), delirium (9.6–89%), pain (68%), malnutrition (2–83%), and pressure ulcers (3–30%). Urinary tract infections, lower respiratory tract infections, skin and soft tissue infections, and gastroenteritis were the most common infections in this setting. Transitions between different care settings (from hospitals to ILCC and vice versa) expose AE risk.

Conclusion

There are many instruments to detect AEs in ILCC, and most have a specific approach. Adverse events affect a significant proportion of patients in ILCC, the nurse-sensitive outcomes, nosocomial infections, and adverse drug events are among the most common.

The systematic review was registered with Prospero, ID: CRD42022348168.

Introduction and objective

The Catalan Health Service carries out the operational planning of service delivery and organization. The goal is to describe the methodology and procedure followed to perform these functions.

Methods

The process of operational planning in healthcare services (OPHS) is continuous, dynamic, participatory, objective, and adaptable. OPHS can be divided into three stages prior to implementation and evaluation: Service delivery planning, Organization of healthcare resources, and Procurement planning.

Results

Three examples of projects are presented following the POSS framework. It is essential to adapt the process to the characteristics of each project.

Conclusions

The proposed framework is useful to achieve high quality and equity in access to services.

Introduction

Acute bronchiolitis is a common reason for admission to the pediatric emergency department. Evidence has shown that most interventions do not change the natural course of the disease.

Material and methods

This study aimed to evaluate the economic impact of the non-compliance with the acute bronchiolitis Portuguese national guideline. A retrospective study of pediatric emergency episodes of a Portuguese hospital that had a diagnosis of acute bronchiolitis during 2019, was conducted.

Results

The sample included 344 emergency episodes. Non-compliance with the guideline occurred in 71.8% of the episodes, mostly due to unjustified treatment. Following guideline in the studied hospital for one year would have resulted in an estimated overall 76.6% cost reduction, with a reduction in mean direct costs per patient of 14.93 €, corresponding to a medium saving of 3.89 € for each patient and a reduction of 11.03 € for the Portuguese National Health Service. Analyzing the unjustified mean direct costs, of these 2.97 € were related to inpatient diagnostic tests and therapeutic and the remaining 11.96 € were related to outpatient therapy. Mean direct costs imputed to the patient for outpatient treatment represented only 3.31 €, therefore most of mean direct costs is paid by the National Health Service.

Conclusions

Compliance with guideline would allow the reduction of total estimated costs by about 76.6%, representing a waste of resources, without compromising the quality of care provided. Most of the cost associated with non-compliance with the guideline is justified by outpatient therapy, 67% of which was paid by the National Health Service.

Objective

To analyze the impact on patient health outcomes after implementing 4 Good Practice Guidelines (GPG) in a level II public university hospital.

Method

A quasi-experimental pre-post study was carried out at the Hospital Universitario Fundación Alcorcón, belonging to the Servicio Madrileño de Salud (SERMAS) of the Community of Madrid. Anonymized patient health indicator data from February 2018 to December 2022 from a total of 4853 patient records were analyzed. Inclusion criteria all patients defined in the scope of each GBP. The sample analyzed was patients discharged in the last 5 working days of the month for all GBPs, except in Ostomy and Stroke, for which 100% of patients discharged during the month were included.

Results

The main results were: incidence of pressure injury from 2.70% (2017) to 1.03% (2022); stoma marking from 66.67% (2017) to 75% (2022); exclusive breastfeeding from 50% (2017) to 61.54% (2022); neurological assessment on admission from 75.56% (2017) to 85.60% (2022).

Conclusions

The implementation of the GBPs led to an improvement in the health indicators of patients admitted to the target units. Improvements were observed in both process and outcome indicators.