Search

Rationale: Unphysiologic strain (the ratio between tidal volume and functional residual capacity) and stress (the transpulmonary pressure) can cause ventilator-induced lung damage. Objectives: To identify a strain-stress threshold (if any) above which ventilator-induced lung damage can occur. Methods: Twenty-nine healthy pigs were mechanically ventilated for 54 hours with a tidal volume producing a strain between 0.45 and 3.30. Ventilator-induced lung damage was defined as net increase in lung weight. Measurements and Main Results: Initial lung weight and functional residual capacity were measured with computed tomography. Final lung weight was measured using a balance. After setting tidal volume, data collection included respiratory system mechanics, gas exchange and hemodynamics (every 6 h); cytokine levels in serum (every 12 h) and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (end of the experiment); and blood laboratory examination (start and end of the experiment). Two clusters of animals could be clearly identified: animals that increased their lung weight (n = 14) and those that did not (n = 15). Tidal volume was 38 ± 9 ml/kg in the former and 22 ± 8 ml/kg in the latter group, corresponding to a strain of 2.16 ± 0.58 and 1.29 ± 0.57 and a stress of 13 ± 5 and 8 ± 3 cm H(2)O, respectively. Lung weight gain was associated with deterioration in respiratory system mechanics, gas exchange, and hemodynamics, pulmonary and systemic inflammation and multiple organ dysfunction. Conclusions: In healthy pigs, ventilator-induced lung damage develops only when a strain greater than 1.5-2 is reached or overcome. Because of differences in intrinsic lung properties, caution is warranted in translating these findings to humans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To examine quality of maternal and newborn care (QMNC) around childbirth in facilities in Belgium during the COVID-19 pandemic and trends over time., Design: A cross-sectional observational study., Setting: Data of the Improving MAternal Newborn carE in the EURO region study in Belgium., Participants: Women giving birth in a Belgian facility from 1 March 2020 to 1 May 2023 responded a validated online questionnaire based on 40 WHO standards-based quality measures organised in four domains: provision of care, experience of care, availability of resources and organisational changes related to COVID-19., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: Quantile regression analysis was performed to assess predictors of QMNC; trends over time were tested with the Mann-Kendall test., Results: 897 women were included in the analysis, 67% (n=601) with spontaneous vaginal birth, 13.3% (n=119) with instrumental vaginal birth (IVB) and 19.7% (n=177) with caesarean section. We found overall high QMNC scores (median index scores>75) but also specific gaps in all domains of QMNC. On provision of care, 21.0% (n=166) of women who experienced labour reported inadequate pain relief, 64.7% (n=74) of women with an instrumental birth reported fundal pressure and 72.3% (n=86) reported that forceps or vacuum cup was used without their consent. On experience of care, 31.1% (n=279) reported unclear communication, 32.9% (n=295) reported that they were not involved in choices,11.5% (n=104) stated not being treated with dignity and 8.1% (n=73) experienced abuse. Related to resources, almost half of the women reported an inadequate number of healthcare professionals (46.2%, n=414). Multivariable analyses showed significantly lower QMNC scores for women with an IVB (-20.4 in the 50th percentile with p<0.001 and 95% CI (-25.2 to -15.5)). Over time, there was a significant increase in QMNC Score for 'experience of care' and 'key organisational changes due to COVID-19' (trend test p< 0.05)., Conclusions and Relevance: Our study showed several gaps in QMNC in Belgium, underlying causes of these gaps should be explored to design appropriate interventions and policies., Trial Registration Number: NCT04847336., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ Group.)

Introduction: Maternal-neonatal healthcare services were severely disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic in even high-income countries within the World Health Organization (WHO) European Region. The objective of this study was to compare trends in the quality of maternal and neonatal care (QMNC) in Sweden and Norway to 12 other countries from the WHO European Region during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to identify domains for improvement., Material and Methods: This cross-sectional study included women giving birth in Europe from March 1, 2020 to December 31, 2022. Women answered an online, anonymous questionnaire which included 40 WHO Standard-based Quality Measures collectively scored as the total QMNC index (0-400) and separately in four subdomains (0-100): provision of care, experience of care, availability of human and physical resources, and reorganizational changes due to COVID-19. To assess reported QMNC changes over time, we used adjusted quantile regression models., Clinicaltrials: gov Identifier: NCT04847336., Results: Of the 45151 women included in the study, 13 117 (29.1%) were from Sweden and Norway and 32034 (70.9%) from the 12 WHO European countries. The total QMNC index for Sweden and Norway (median: 325, IQR: 285-355) was higher than the 12 WHO European countries (median: 315, IQR: 265-350, p < 0.001) as were trends in QMNC index over time (Sweden and Norway median: 310-345; 12 WHO European countries median: 305-340). Sweden and Norway also had higher scores in three-of-four QMNC subdomains, with the 12 WHO European countries scoring higher only for reorganizational changes due to COVID-19. In adjusted quantile models of the total QMNC index, Sweden and Norway had higher scores, with largest differences in the lower quantiles (p < 0.001 in all percentiles)., Conclusions: Across Europe, there are significant gaps in the quality of maternal-neonatal healthcare services. Although women giving birth in Sweden and Norway reported higher QMNC scores in all subdomains except for "reorganizational changes due to COVID-19," there is room for improvement and shared learning across Europe. Policymakers should prioritize long-term investments in maternal and neonatal healthcare, ensuring that facilities are adequately equipped during public health crises and that all women have access to high-quality, evidence-based, equitable, and respectful care., (© 2024 The Author(s). Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology (NFOG).)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic had an important psychological impact on children and their families. This study aims to explore paediatric health services users' perceptions of quality of care (QOC) and COVID-19-related fears, and their evolution over time in relation to COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: In a multicentre cross-sectional study involving 11 public hospitals providing paediatric care across the Italian territory, we collected data from services users through a validated questionnaire. We analysed four indicators-(1) QOC perceived in relation to COVID-19; (2) overall QOC perceived; (3) fear of accessing health services due to COVID-19; (4) fear of contracting COVID-19 in hospital-and calculated Spearman's correlation indexes (ρ) with the number of COVID-19 new cases over time. Subgroup analyses were conducted by macroregions and single facility., Results: Data from 956 services users were analysed. QOC indicators were stable over time at values close to the maximum (range 77-100 and median 100 for COVID-19 QOC, range 74-98 and median 80 for overall QOC), and no correlations were found with the COVID-19 new cases (ρ=-0.073 and -0.016, respectively). Fear of accessing care and fear of contracting the infection varied over time in between 0%-52% and 0%-53%, respectively, but did not correlate directly with number of COVID-19 new cases (ρ=0.101, 0.107 and 0.233, 0.046, respectively). At subgroup analyses, significantly higher frequencies of fear (p values <0.05) and lower QOC (p values <0.001) were reported in South Italy, and three facilities showed moderate correlation between these indicators., Conclusions: COVID-19-related fears and perceived QOC may be mediated by more complex cultural and facility/regional-level factors, than simply by epidemic peaks. Subgroup analyses can help unpack major differences within the same country., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Collecting women's views and suggestions for improving quality of maternal-newborn care (QMNC) is a crucial aspect of maternity care evaluation often overlooked in Italy and globally. Childbearing women experienced numerous challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic including the rapid and significant reorganization of maternity services and care. Their perspective on what to prioritize for QMNC improvement is hence pivotal. The aim of this study was to explore maternal suggestions for QMNC improvement from women who gave birth during the two years of the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: Data were collected from an open-ended question included in a validated online questionnaire administered to mothers who gave birth in an Italian hospital between November 2020 to March 2022. The responses were analyzed using thematic analysis and mapped against the WHO Standards for improving QMNC and the WHO Framework of QMNC., Results: The thematic analysis identified five main themes from the 2017 responses: 1) Support for mothers during the postnatal period; 2) Better use of resources; 3) Improvement of the maternity environment; 4) Reconsideration of organizational aspects; and 5) Guarantee of respectful practices. Women commented on all dimensions of the WHO framework except for two provision of care subdomains 'actionable information and functional referral systems'., Conclusions: This is the first qualitative study in Italy focusing on women's suggestions for improving QMNC during the COVID-19 pandemic. Its findings can be used to inform what aspects of QMNC need improvement in Italy. Collection of women's views should be incorporated in routine monitoring of the QMNC, and data should be used for quality improvement purposes., Competing Interests: The authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest and none was reported., (© 2024 Fumagalli S. et al.)

Background: Health workers' (HWs') perspectives on the quality of maternal and newborn care (QMNC) are not routinely collected. In this cross-sectional study, we aimed to document HWs' perspectives on QMNC around childbirth in 12 World Health Organization (WHO) European countries., Methods: HWs involved in maternal/neonatal care for at least one year between March 2020 and March 2023 answered an online validated WHO standards-based questionnaire collecting 40 quality measures for improving QMNC. A QMNC index (score 0-400) was calculated as a synthetic measure., Results: Data from 4143 respondents were analysed. For 39 out of 40 quality measures, at least 20% of HWs reported a 'need for improvement', with large variations across countries. Effective training on healthy women/newborns management (n = 2748, 66.3%), availability of informed consent job aids (n = 2770, 66.9%), and effective training on women/newborns rights (n = 2714, 65.5%) presented the highest proportion of HWs stating 'need for improvement'. Overall, 64.8% (n = 2684) of respondents declared that HWs' numbers were insufficient for appropriate care (66.3% in Portugal and 86.6% in Poland), and 22.4% described staff censorship (16.3% in Germany and 56.7% in Poland). The reported QMNC index was low in all countries (Poland median (MD) = 210.60, interquartile range (IQR) = 155.71, 273.57; Norway MD = 277.86; IQR = 244.32, 308.30). The 'experience of care' domain presented in eight countries had significantly lower scores than the other domains (P < 0.001). Over time, there was a significant monthly linear decrease in the QMNC index (P < 0.001), lacking correlation with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic trends (P > 0.05). Multivariate analyses confirmed large QMNC variation by country. HWs with <10 years of experience, HWs from public facilities, and midwives rated QMNC with significantly lower scores (P < 0.001)., Conclusions: HWs from 12 European countries reported significant gaps in QMNC, lacking association with COVID-19 pandemic trends. Routine monitoring of QMNC and tailored actions are needed to improve health services for the benefit of both users and providers., Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04847336., Competing Interests: Disclosure of interests: The authors completed the ICMJE Disclosure of Interest Form (available upon request from the corresponding author) and disclose no relevant interests., (Copyright © 2024 by the Journal of Global Health. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is little experience on the use of the WHO Standards for improving the quality of care (QOC) for children. We describe the use of four prioritised WHO Standard-based Quality Measures to assess the provision of care for children with pain in emergency departments (EDs)., Methods: In a multicentre observational study in 10 EDs with different characteristics in Italy, we collected data on 3355 children accessing the EDs between January 2019 and December 2020. The association between children and facility characteristics and quality measures was analysed through multivariate analyses., Results: The proportion of children whose pain was measured was 68.7% (n=2305), with extreme variations across different centres (from 0.0% to 99.8%, p<0.001). The proportion of children treated for pain was 28.9% (n=970) again with a wide range (5.3%-56.3%, p<0.001). The difference between the frequency of children with pain measured and pain treated varied widely between the facilities (ranging from -24.3 to 82). Children with moderate and severe pain were more frequently treated (48.9% and 62.9% of cases, respectively), although with large variations across centres (ranges: 0%-74.8% and 0%-100% respectively, p<0.001). After correction for children's characteristics, the variable more strongly associated with analysed outcomes was the facility which the child accessed for care. Being a facility in Northern Italy was associated with a higher rate of pain measurement (67.3%-95% CI: 39.9% to 94.6%, p<0.001) compared with facilities in South Italy (-22.1% lower (95% CI: -41.7% to -2.50%, p=0.03)., Conclusions: The use of few WHO Standard-based measures related to pain can help identifying priority gaps in QOC for children and in monitoring it over time. There is a need for more implementation research to establish which are the most sustainable and effective interventions to improve the QOC for acute pain in children., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Experience is lacking on the implementation of the WHO standards for improving the quality of care (QOC) for children at facility level. We describe the use of 10 prioritised WHO standard-based quality measures to assess provision of care for children with acute respiratory infections (ARI) in Italy., Methods: In a multicentre observational study across 11 emergency departments with different characteristics, we collected 10 WHO standard-based quality measures related to case management of children with ARI and no emergency/priority signs. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted., Results: Data from 3145 children were collected. Major differences in QOC across facilities were observed: documentation of saturation level and respiratory rate varied from 34.3% to 100% and from 10.7% to 62.7%, respectively (p<0.001); antibiotic prescription rates ranged from 22.6% to 80.0% (p<0.001), with significant differences in the pattern of prescribed antibiotic; hospitalisations rates ranged between 2.3% and 30.6% (p<0.001). When corrected for children's individual sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, the variable more consistently associated with each analysed outcome was the individual facility where the child was managed. Higher rates of antibiotics prescription (+33.1%, p<0.001) and hospitalisation (+24.7%, p<0.001) were observed for facilities in Southern Italy, while university centres were associated with lower hospitalisation rates (-13.1%, p<0.001), independently from children's characteristics., Conclusions: The use of 10 WHO standard-based measures can help quickly assess QOC for children with ARI. There is an urgent need to invest more in implementation research to identify sustainable and effective interventions to ensure that all children receive high QOC., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: There is little experience in the use of the WHO Standards for improving the quality of care (QOC) for children at the facility level. We describe the use of 75 WHO Standard based Quality Measures to assess paediatric QOC, using service users as a source of data, in Italy., Study Design: In a cross-sectional study including 12 hospitals, parents/caregivers of admitted children completed a validated questionnaire including 75 Quality Measures: 40 pertinent to the domain of experience of care; 25 to physical/structural resources; 10 to COVID-19 reorganisational changes. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted., Results: Answers from 1482 service users were analysed. Physical resources was the domain with the higher frequency of reported gaps in QOC, with key gaps (higher rates of responders reporting need for improvement and low variability across centres) being: (1) quality of meals (48.1%; range across facilities: 35.3%-61.7%); (2) presence of cooking areas (50.9%; range: 34.6%-70.0%); (3) spaces for family/friends (51.3%; range: 31.8%-77.4%). For experience of care , the most critical gap was the information on the rights of the child (76.6%; range: 59.9%-90.4%), with most other Quality Measures showing an overall frequency of reported need for improvement ranging between 5% and 35%. For reorganisational changes due to COVID-19 an improvement was felt necessary by <25% of responders in all Quality Measures, with low variability across centres. At the multivariate analyses, factors significantly associated with the QOC Index largely varied by QOC domain., Conclusions: The use of the 75 prioritised Quality Measures, specific to service users' perspective, enabled the identification of both general and facility-specific gaps in QOC. Based on these findings, quality improvement initiatives shall focus on a core list of selected Quality Measures common to all facilities, plus on an additional list of Quality Measures as more relevant in each facility., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: There is little experience in implementing the WHO Standards for improving the quality of care (QOC) for children. We describe the use of 75 WHO-Standard based Quality Measures to assess paediatric QOC, using health workers (HWs) as data sources., Design: Cross-sectional study., Setting: 12 Italian hospitals., Participants: The minimum target of 75% of HWs was reached in all facilities; answers from 598 HWs were analysed., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: 75 prioritised WHO Quality Measures were collected using a validated, and Italian-language questionnaire exploring views of HWs providing care to children. A QOC index was also calculated based on the assessed Quality Measures., Results: In both the domain of resources and work organisation, most Quality Measures showed a high overall frequency of reported 'need for improvement', with high variability across hospitals. Key needs for improvement included: availability of clear and complete protocols (eg, on paediatric emergencies: 44.6%; range 10.6%-92.6%); clear hospitalisation criteria for diarrhoea (50.5%; range 30.3%-71.7%); number of hand-washing stations (13.2%; range 3.4%-37.0%); equipped working rooms with computers for HWs (66.1%; range: 32.1%-97.0%); training (eg, on pain management: 43.5%; range 17.9%-76.7%), periodic discussion of clinical cases (43.5%; range 8.1%-83.7%) audits (48.8%; range 29.7%-76.7%); and all indicators related to system to improve QOC. Factors significantly associated with a lower QOC Index included HWs working in facilities in Southern Italy (p=0.001) and absence of a paediatric emergency department (p=0.011)., Conclusions: The use of the 75 prioritised Quality Measures, specific to HWs provide valuable data on paediatric QOC, which can be used to drive a quality improvement process., Competing Interests: Competing interests: No, there are no competing interests., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: There is no documented experience in the use of the WHO standards for improving the quality of care (QOC) for children at the facility level. We describe the use of 10 prioritised WHO-Standard-based Quality Measures to assess QOC for children with acute diarrhoea (AD) in Italy., Methods: In a multicentre observational study in 11 paediatric emergency departments with different characteristics and geographical location, we collected data on 3061 children aged 6 months to 15 years with AD and no complications. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted., Results: Study findings highlighted both good practices and gaps in QoC, with major differences in QOC across facilities. Documentation of body weight and temperature varied from 7.7% to 98.5% and from 50% to 97.7%, respectively (p<0.001); antibiotic and probiotic prescription rates ranged from 0% to 10.1% and from 0% to 80.8%, respectively (p<0.001); hospitalisations rates ranged between 8.5% and 62.8% (p<0.001); written indications for reassessment were provided in 10.4%-90.2% of cases (p<0.001). When corrected for children's individual characteristics, the variable more consistently associated with each analysed outcome was the individual facility. Higher rates of antibiotics prescription (+7.6%, p=0.04) and hospitalisation (+52.9%, p<0.001) were observed for facilities in Southern Italy, compared with university centres (-36%, p<0.001), independently from children characteristics. Children's clinical characteristics in each centre were not associated with either hospitalisation or antibiotic prescription rates., Conclusions: The 10 prioritised WHO-Standard-based Quality Measures allow a rapid assessment of QOC in children with AD. Action is needed to identify and implement sustainable and effective interventions to ensure high QOC for all children., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)