RESUMEN
(1) Background: Identifying and measuring adverse events (AE) is a priority for patient safety, which allows us to define and prioritise areas for improvement and evaluate and develop solutions to improve health care quality. The aim of this work was to determine the prevalence of AEs in surgical and medical-surgical departments and to know the health impact of these AEs. (2) Methods: A cross-sectional study determining the prevalence of AEs in surgical and medical-surgical departments was conducted and a comparison was made among both clinical areas. A total of 5228 patients were admitted in 58 hospitals in Argentina, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico, and Peru, within the Latin American Study of Adverse Events (IBEAS), led by the Spanish Ministry of Health, the Pan American Health Organization, and the WHO Patient Safety programme. (3) Results: The global prevalence of AEs was 10.7%. However, the prevalence of AEs in surgical departments was 11.9%, while in medical-surgical departments it was 8.9%. The causes of these AEs were associated with surgical procedures (38.6%) and nosocomial infections (35.4%). About 60.6% of the AEs extended hospital stays by 30.7 days on average and 25.8% led to readmission with an average hospitalisation of 15 days. About 22.4% resulted in death, disability, or surgical reintervention. (4) Conclusions: Surgical departments were associated with a higher risk of experiencing AEs.
Asunto(s)
Errores Médicos , Seguridad del Paciente , Medición de Riesgo , Servicio de Cirugía en Hospital , Adulto , Argentina , Colombia , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , México , Persona de Mediana Edad , Perú , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo/métodosRESUMEN
[EXCERPT]. Analyzing the causes of unsafe care can reduce the number of ‘near misses’ (incidents that may cause harm to patients) and adverse events (that actually produce harm). This is an important mandate for health care organizations committed to providing a safe environment for patients. Although guaranteeing absolute safety in all interventions is not always possible, hospitals and other health care institutions implement safety practices and surveillance methods to understand how these unsafe incidents occur. In many cases, these incidents were not generated by a single cause; and remote causes are as significant as more proximate ones...
Asunto(s)
Pacientes , Análisis de Causa Raíz , Medicina Preventiva , Salud Pública , SeguridadRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Adverse events (AEs) epidemiology is the first step to improve practice in the healthcare system. Usually, the preferred method used to estimate the magnitude of the problem is the retrospective cohort study design, with retrospective reviews of the medical records. However this data collection involves a sophisticated sampling plan, and a process of intensive review of sometimes very heavy and complex medical records. Cross-sectional survey is also a valid and feasible methodology to study AEs. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to compare AEs detection using two different methodologies: cross-sectional versus retrospective cohort design. SETTING: Secondary and tertiary hospitals in five countries: Argentina, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico and Peru. PARTICIPANTS: The IBEAS Study is a cross-sectional survey with a sample size of 11 379 patients. The retrospective cohort study was obtained from a 10% random sample proportional to hospital size from the entire IBEAS Study population. METHODS: This study compares the 1-day prevalence of the AEs obtained in the IBEAS Study with the incidence obtained through the retrospective cohort study. RESULTS: The prevalence of patients with AEs was 10.47% (95% CI 9.90 to 11.03) (1191/11 379), while the cumulative incidence of the retrospective cohort study was 19.76% (95% CI 17.35% to 22.17%) (215/1088). In both studies the highest risk of suffering AEs was seen in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients. Comorbid patients and patients with medical devices showed higher risk. CONCLUSION: The retrospective cohort design, although requires more resources, allows to detect more AEs than the cross-sectional design.
Asunto(s)
Investigación sobre Servicios de Salud/normas , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Errores Médicos/estadística & datos numéricos , Proyectos de Investigación/normas , Adulto , Argentina/epidemiología , Colombia/epidemiología , Costa Rica/epidemiología , Infección Hospitalaria/epidemiología , Estudios Transversales/métodos , Estudios de Factibilidad , Femenino , Humanos , Complicaciones Intraoperatorias/epidemiología , Masculino , Errores Médicos/prevención & control , México/epidemiología , Seguridad del Paciente , Perú/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Gestión de RiesgosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The occurrence of adverse events is a problem at all levels of care and creates a significant burden of morbidity and mortality. In Spain there have been significant investigations of adverse effects (AE) in hospitals and primary care, however, studies of pre-hospital care are not yet developed. The aim of this study was to determine the frequency, type, preventability, severity and impact of "pre-hospital" adverse events, which were detected in the hospitalization index and the comparing those that occurred in ambulatory and non-ambulatory care. METHOD: Case Series Study, with analytical components, of a sample of subjects included in the "National study of adverse events related to hospitalization (ENEAS). Qualitative data are presented as proportions with confidence intervals. For comparative analysis of qualitative data, we used the chi-square test. RESULTS: Of a total of 5624 patients, 2.3% (N=131) ((95%)CI: 1.94-2.72) had an AE that occurred prior to hospitalization or "pre-hospital", and 40.5% of these (N=53) ((95%)CI: 32.05-48.86) were preventable. In 44 patients the AE had its origin in ambulatory care and 85 patients in non-ambulatory care. The characteristic of patients with ambulatory AE are men and older women (median 76 years) who consulted for medical problems (84.1%) and the AE were related to medication in 77.8%. The characteristic of patients with non-ambulatory AE, were men (median 73 years), consulting for medical and surgical problems (44,7-55,3%) and the EA is related to medications, infections and procedures. CONCLUSIONS: The characteristics of patients with AE and undesirable effects that occurred during pre-hospitalization period depended on whether they originated during ambulatory care or non-ambulatory care. Therefore prevention strategies should take these differences into account.