What are Patients' Concerns about Medical Errors in an Emergency Department?

STOPP-START Medication Review: A Non-Randomized Trial in an Indonesian Tertiary Hospital to Improve Medication Appropriateness and to Reduce the Length of Stay of Older Adults

Background: Inappropriate prescribing may lead to medication errors among older adults. Pharmacists can curb the occurrences of these errors by conducting medication reviews. Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions (STOPP) or Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatments (START) may curb the incidence of adverse drug reactions and improve medication appropriateness by providing guides about when particular types of medications should be started or stopped. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the use of STOPP/START to improve the Adapted Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI), to reduce the risk of ADRs (GerontoNet score), and length of stay (LOS). Setting: Geriatric Inpatient Ward, Sanglah General Hospital, Bali, Indonesia. Method: A non-randomized controlled trial was conducted in older adults (>60 years) who were selected consecutively from inpatient units in a tertiary hospital in Bali, Indonesia. The intervention group received medication reviews by pharmacists in collaboration with physicians to assess its appropriateness with STOPP/START criteria on admission and during their stay at the hospital. The control group obtained standard care. Main Outcome Measures: The outcomes were measured using the Adapted MAI, GerontoNet Score, and LOS. Results: Thirty patients in the intervention group and 33 patients in the control group were included in this study. The adapted MAI was 2.97 (2.25) and 9.94 (6.14) with P < .001. The GerontoNet score was 3.33 (2.28) and 5.18 (2.10) with P = .003, LOS was 7.63 (3.00) days and 14.18 (9.97) days with P = .011, respectively. Conclusion: The use of STOPP/START as a tool for medication review improved medication appropriateness and reduced ADR risk and LOS.

Hospital management training for the Eastern Mediterranean Region: time for a change?

PURPOSE

The WHO Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office has emphasized health system strengthening among the top five strategic priorities. One of the integral elements of health systems are the hospitals. The purpose of this paper is to review the need for formalized training in hospital management to improve the quality of care.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

Literature review and hands on experience of conducting a regional training in hospital management for Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR) countries.

FINDINGS

Majority of patients in EMR bypass Primary Health Care facilities due to inadequate quality of services and prefer seeking specialized care at a tertiary level. There is mounting evidence of mediocre to poor patient satisfaction due to inefficient health care practices in hospitals of EMR. Strengthening the management capacity of the hospitals through a formal training programme is therefore necessary for improving the performance of health care delivery and the overall health system. Hospital management encompasses hospital planning and operational activities including development and implementation of organizational strategies to ensure adequate numbers and quality of trained human resources and effective financial management, disaster management, health management information system utilization, support services, biomedical engineering, transport and waste management. Such training will prepare health care professionals with leadership skills to deliver quality hospital services.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

This is one of the first papers emphasizing the need for a formal structured regional training in hospital management for the countries of EMR. A modular incremental training approach developing an EMR Credit Transfer and Accumulation system is proposed.

The missing evidence: a systematic review of patients' experiences of adverse events in health care

PURPOSE

Preventable patient harm due to adverse events (AEs) is a significant health problem today facing contemporary health care. Knowledge of patients' experiences of AEs is critical to improving health care safety and quality. A systematic review of studies of patients' experiences of AEs was conducted to report their experiences, knowledge gaps and any challenges encountered when capturing patient experience data.

DATA SOURCES

Key words, synonyms and subject headings were used to search eight electronic databases from January 2000 to February 2015, in addition to hand-searching of reference lists and relevant journals.

STUDY SELECTION

Titles and abstracts of publications were screened by two reviewers and checked by a third. Full-text articles were screened against the eligibility criteria.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data on design, methods and key findings were extracted and collated.

RESULTS

Thirty-three publications demonstrated patients identifying a range of problems in their care; most commonly identified were medication errors, communication and coordination of care problems. Patients' income, education, health burden and marital status influence likelihood of reporting. Patients report distress after an AE, often exacerbated by receiving inadequate information about the cause. Investigating patients' experiences is hampered by the lack of large representative patient samples, data over sufficient time periods and varying definitions of an AE.

CONCLUSION

Despite the emergence of policy initiatives to enhance patient engagement, few studies report patients' experiences of AEs. This information must be routinely captured and utilized to develop effective, patient-centred and system-wide policies to minimize and manage AEs.

Disclosure of Medical Errors in Oman: Public preferences and perceptions of current practice

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to provide insight into the preferences for and perceptions of medical error disclosure (MED) by members of the public in Oman.

METHODS

Between January and June 2012, an online survey was used to collect responses from 205 members of the public across five governorates of Oman.

RESULTS

A disclosure gap was revealed between the respondents' preferences for MED and perceived current MED practices in Oman. This disclosure gap extended to both the type of error and the person most likely to disclose the error. Errors resulting in patient harm were found to have a strong influence on individuals' perceived quality of care. In addition, full disclosure was found to be highly valued by respondents and able to mitigate for a perceived lack of care in cases where medical errors led to damages.

CONCLUSION

The perceived disclosure gap between respondents' MED preferences and perceptions of current MED practices in Oman needs to be addressed in order to increase public confidence in the national health care system.