Search

Background: Patient safety in primary care is an emerging field of research with a growing evidence base in western countries but little has been explored in the Gulf Cooperation Council Countries (GCC) including the Sultanate of Oman. This study aimed to review the literature on the safety culture and patient safety measures used globally to inform the development of safety culture among health care workers in primary care with a particular focus on the Middle East. Methods: A systematic review of the literature. Searches were undertaken using Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and Scopus from the year 2000 to 2014. Terms defining safety culture were combined with terms identifying patient safety and primary care. Results: The database searches identified 3072 papers that were screened for inclusion in the review. After the screening and verification, data were extracted from 28 papers that described safety culture in primary care. The global distribution of the articles is as follows: the Netherlands (7), the United States (5), Germany (4), the United Kingdom (1), Australia, Canada and Brazil (two for each country), and with one each from Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. The characteristics of the included studies were grouped under the following themes: safety culture in primary care, incident reporting, safety climate and adverse events. The most common theme from 2011 onwards was the assessment of safety culture in primary care (13 studies, 46%). The most commonly used safety culture assessment tool is the Hospital survey on patient safety culture (HSOPSC) which has been used in developing countries in the Middle East. Conclusions: This systematic review reveals that the most important first step is the assessment of safety culture in primary care which will provide a basic understanding to safety-related perceptions of health care providers. The HSOPSC has been commonly used in Kuwait, Turkey, and Iran. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Lead exposure (LE) and its attributable deaths and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) have declined in the recent decade; however, it remains one of the leading public health concerns, particularly in regions with low socio-demographic index (SDI) such as the North Africa and Middle East (NAME) region. Hence, we aimed to describe the attributable burden of the LE in this region.Methods: Data on deaths, DALYs, years of life lost (YLLs), and years lived with disability (YLDs) attributable to LE in the NAME region and its 21 countries from 1990 to 2019 were extracted from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2019 study.Results: In 2019, the age-standardized death and DALY rates attributable to LE were 23.4 (95% uncertainty interval: 15.1 to 33.3) and 489.3 (320.5 to 669.6) per 100,000 in the region, respectively, both of which were higher among men than women. The overall age-standardized death and DALY rates showed 27.7% and 36.8% decreases, respectively, between 1990 and 2019. In this period, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, and Turkey had the highest decreases in the age-standardized death and DALY rates, while Afghanistan, Egypt, and Yemen had the lowest ones. Countries within high SDI quintile had lower attributable burden to LE compared with the low SDI quintile. Cardiovascular diseases and chronic kidney diseases accounted for the 414.2 (258.6 to 580.6) and 28.7 (17.7 to 41.7) LE attributable DALYs per 100,000 in 2019, respectively. The attributable YLDs was 46.4 (20.7 to 82.1) per 100,000 in 2019, which shows a 25.7% reduction (-30.8 to -22.5%) over 1990-2019.Conclusions: The overall LE and its attributed burden by cause have decreased in the region from 1990-2019. Nevertheless, the application of cost-effective and long-term programs for decreasing LE and its consequences in NAME is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Capacity for health economics analysis and research is indispensable for evidence-informed allocations of scarce health resources; however, little is known about the experience and capacity strengthening preferences of academics and practitioners in the Eastern Mediterranean region. This study aimed to assess the needs for strengthening health economics capacity in Jordan, Lebanon, the occupied Palestinian territories and Turkey as part of the Research for Health in Conflict in the Middle East and North Africa (R4HC) project.Methods: We combined a bibliometric analysis of health economics outputs based on a literature search conducted across seven databases with an online survey of academic researchers and non-academic practitioners. The records included in the bibliometric analysis were original studies and reviews with an explicit economic outcome related to health, disease or disability, had at least one author in Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine or Turkey, and were published between January 2014 and December 2018. Two types of analyses were conducted using VOSviewer software, namely keyword co-occurrence and co-publication networks across countries and organisations. The online survey asked academic researchers, analysts and decision-makers - identified through the bibliometric analysis and regional professional networks - about previous exposure to and priorities for capacity development in health economics.Results: Of 15,185 records returned by the literature search, 566 were included in the bibliometric analysis. Organisations in Turkey contributed more than 80% of records and had the broadest and most diverse network of collaborators, nationally and internationally. Only 1% (n = 7) of studies were collaborations between researchers in two or more different jurisdictions. Cost analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis and health system economics were the main health economics topics across the included studies. Economic evaluations, measuring the economic burden of disease and health equity, were reported by survey respondents (n = 80) as the most important areas to develop in. Short courses, learn-by-doing and mentoring from an experienced professional were, in aggregate, the most preferred learning styles.Conclusions: Existing pockets of health economic expertise in the region can constitute the base of future capacity development efforts. Building confidence toward applying specific methods and trust toward stimulating cross-jurisdiction collaborations appear essential components for sustainably developing health economics capacity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]