Search

Purpose: To summarize the knowledge about the aftermath of adverse events (AEs) and develop a recommendation set to reduce their negative impact in patients, health professionals and organizations in contexts where there is no previous experiences and apology laws are not present.Data Sources: Review studies published between 2000 and 2015, institutional websites and experts' opinions on patient safety.Study Selection: Studies published and websites on open disclosure, and the second and third victims' phenomenon. Four Focus Groups participating 27 healthcare professionals.Data Extraction: Study characteristic and outcome data were abstracted by two authors and reviewed by the research team.Results Of Data Synthesis: Fourteen publications and 16 websites were reviewed. The recommendations were structured around eight areas: (i) safety and organizational policies, (ii) patient care, (iii) proactive approach to preventing reoccurrence, (iv) supporting the clinician and healthcare team, (v) activation of resources to provide an appropriate response, (vi) informing patients and/or family members, (vii) incidents' analysis and (viii) protecting the reputation of health professionals and the organization.Conclusion: Recommendations preventing aftermath of AEs have been identified. These have been designed for the hospital and the primary care settings; to cope with patient's emotions and for tacking the impact of AE in the second victim's colleagues. Its systematic use should help for the establishment of organizational action plans after an AE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background In 2002, Spain introduced new legislation regulating the rights of patients. Spaniards have thus seen an increase in their capacity for decision-making, bringing them into line with many other countries. However, the law changes do not mean to be acquainted with the new legislation and therefore, putting it into practice. Objective To analyse whether the rules governing patients' rights in Spain are sufficiently well known among patients and to identify the profile of those patients most aware of their rights. Design Cross-sectional quota-sampled survey study. A total of 790 patients discharged from hospitals or attended in primary care took a telephone survey, 773 replayed. Results Twenty per cent had some knowledge of the rules governing patients' rights. Respondent characteristics that were associated with better knowledge of basic rights included: age of medical responsibility (P < 0.001), cases in which a doctor may inform family members (P < 0.001), whether or not a patient can refuse treatment (P < 0.001) and what is constituted by advance directives (P < 0.001). Patients who opt for a more active role in consultations with medical professionals show greater knowledge of their rights (P < 0.01). Age was related to greater ignorance of these rights (P < 0.01). Conclusions Patients' knowledge of their rights is quite limited, making it difficult for them to assert those rights in specific medical encounters. The youngest patients, the most demanding, and those who prefer to have the last word in decisions are those with the best knowledge of their rights as patients. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article discusses the Ebola virus disease (EVD) which has been declared by the World Health Organization (WHO) on August 2014 as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. It cites the epidemiological characteristics of infectivity and virulence that define the severity of the disease. The assurance of the importance of the EVD protocols in protecting the health professionals from the threats that are linked to their work is also emphasized.