Search

Background: The secondary use of health data for research raises complex questions of privacy and governance. Such questions are ill-suited to opinion polling where citizens must choose quickly between multiple-choice answers based on little information. Objective: The aim of this project was to extend knowledge about what control informed citizens would seek over the use of health records for research after participating in a deliberative process using citizens’ juries. Methods: Two 3-day citizens’ juries, of 17 citizens each, were convened to reflect UK national demographics from 355 eligible applicants. Each jury addressed the mission “To what extent should patients control access to patient records for secondary use?” Jurors heard from and questioned 5 expert witnesses (chosen either to inform the jury, or to argue for and against the secondary use of data), interspersed with structured opportunities to deliberate among themselves, including discussion and role-play. Jurors voted on a series of questions associated with the jury mission, giving their rationale. Individual views were polled using questionnaires at the beginning and at end of the process. Results: At the end of the process, 33 out of 34 jurors voted in support of the secondary use of data for research, with 24 wanting individuals to be able to opt out, 6 favoring opt in, and 3 voting that all records should be available without any consent process. When considering who should get access to data, both juries had very similar rationales. Both thought that public benefit was a key justification for access. Jury 1 was more strongly supportive of sharing patient records for public benefit, whereas jury 2 was more cautious and sought to give patients more control. Many jurors changed their opinion about who should get access to health records: 17 people became more willing to support wider information sharing of health data for public benefit, whereas 2 moved toward more patient control over patient records. Conclusions: The findings highlight that, when informed of both risks and opportunities associated with data sharing, citizens believe an individual’s right to privacy should not prevent research that can benefit the general public. The juries also concluded that patients should be notified of any such scheme and have the right to opt out if they so choose. Many jurors changed their minds about this complex policy question when they became more informed. Many, but not all, jurors became less skeptical about health data sharing, as they became better informed of its benefits and risks.

Este trabajo presenta los resultados de una encuesta acerca de la vigilancia tecnológica llevada a cabo en 21 instituciones de salud del suroeste de Colombia. Adicionalmente proporciona un análisis de cómo estos programas consideran diferentes metodologías de manejo de riesgos para crear conciencia en todos los empleados de la importancia de la seguridad de los pacientes y así mejorar la calidad de los servicios de salud prestados This paper presents the results of a survey about technovigilance carried out in 21 clinical institutions from the southwest of Colombia. It also provides an analysis of how these programs take into account different risk management methodologies in order to create awareness of the importance of patient safety in all members of the staff and improve the quality of the health services provided ste trabalho apresenta os resultados de uma pesquisa a respeito da vigilância tecnológica levada a cabo em 21 instituições de saúde do sudoeste da Colômbia. Adicionalmente proporciona uma análise de como estes programas consideram diferentes metodologias do controle de riscos para criar consciência em todos os empregados da importância da segurança dos pacientes e assim melhorar a qualidade dos serviços de saúde emprestados

Missed appointments create many problems in dental practices, as those patients who fail to turn up deprive other patients of an opportunity for treatment. This paper reports on a study of failures to attend appointments without giving advance notice in a NHS practice in the UK. A sample of 588 patients is analysed using Logit and Distribution Mixtures in order to devise policies to improve no-show rates. It is shown that a policy based on de-registration of patients who fail to attend an appointment would be justified on statistical grounds and would work in the long run, but that such policy would not improve things in the short run and can make them worse. The paper also discusses emergency treatment and workload at the practice.