Association between hospital procedure volume, socioeconomic status, comorbidities, and adverse events related to surgical abortion: a nationwide population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence exists on the influence of hospital procedure volume, socioeconomic status, and comorbidities on surgical abortion outcomes. OBJECTIVE: Our study aimed to assess the association between hospital procedure volume, individual and neighborhood deprivation, comorbidities, and abortion-related adverse events. STUDY DESIGN: A nationwide population-based cohort study of all women hospitalized for surgical abortion was conducted from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2019 in France. Annual hospital procedure volume was categorized into 4 levels based on spline function visualization: very low (<80), low ([80-300]), high ([300-650]), and very high-volume (≥650) centers. The primary outcome was the occurrence of at least one surgical-related adverse event, including hemorrhage, retained products of conception, genital tract and pelvic infection, transfusion, fistulas and neighboring lesions, local hematoma, failure of abortion, and admission to an intensive care unit or death. These events were monitored during the index stay and during a subsequent hospitalization up to 90 days. The secondary outcome encompassed general adverse events not directly linked to surgery. RESULTS: Of the 112,842 hospital stays, 4951 (4.39%) had surgical-related adverse events and 256 (0.23%) had general adverse events. The multivariate analysis showed a volume-outcome relationship, with lower rates of surgical-related adverse events in very high-volume (2.25%, aOR=0.34, 95% CI [0.29-0.39], P<.001), high-volume (4.24%, aOR=0.61, 95% CI [0.55-0.69], P<.001), and low-volume (4.69%, aOR=0.81, 95% CI [0.75-0.88], P<.001) wh en compared to very low-volume centers (6.65%). Individual socioeconomic status (aOR=1.69, 95% CI [1.47-1.94], P<.001), neighborhood deprivation (aOR=1.31, 95% CI [1.22-1.39], P<.001), and comorbidities (aOR=1.79, 95% CI [1.35-2.38], P<.001) were associated with surgical-related adverse events. Conversely, the multivariate analysis of general adverse events did not reveal any volume-outcome relationship. CONCLUSION: The presence of a volume-outcome relationship underscores the need for enhanced safety standards in low-volume centers to ensure equity in women's safety during surgical abortions. However, our findings also highlight the complexity of this safety concern which involves multiple other factors including socioeconomic status and comorbidities that policymakers must consider.

Exploring the fear of clinical errors: associations with socio-demographic, professional, burnout, and mental health factors in healthcare workers - A nationwide cross-sectional study.

Background: The fear of clinical errors among healthcare workers (HCW) is an understudied aspect of patient safety. This study aims to describe this phenomenon among HCW and identify associated socio-demographic, professional, burnout and mental health factors. Methods: We conducted a nationwide, online, cross-sectional study targeting HCW in France from May to June 2021. Recruitment was through social networks, professional networks, and email invitations. To assess the fear of making clinical errors, HCW were asked: "During your daily activities, how often are you afraid of making a professional error that could jeopardize patient safety?" Responses were collected on a 7-point Likert-type scale. HCW were categorized into "High Fear" for those who reported experiencing fear frequently ("once a week," "a few times a week," or "every day"), vs. "Low Fear" for less often. We used multivariate logistic regression to analyze associations between fear of clinical errors and various factors, including sociodemographic, professional, burnout, and mental health. Structural equation modeling was used to explore how this fear fits into a comprehensive theoretical framework. Results: We recruited a total of 10,325 HCW, of whom 25.9% reported "High Fear" (95% CI: 25.0-26.7%). Multivariate analysis revealed higher odds of "High Fear" among males, younger individuals, and those with less professional experience. High fear was more notable among physicians and nurses, and those working in critical care and surgery, on night shifts or with irregular schedules. Significant associations were found between "High Fear" and burnout, low professional support, major depressive disorder, and sleep disorders. Conclusions: Fear of clinical errors is associated with factors that also influence patient safety, highlighting the importance of this experience. Incorporating this dimension into patient safety culture assessment could provide valuable insights and could inform ways to proactively enhance patient safety.

The impact of hospital saturation on non-COVID-19 hospital mortality during the pandemic in France: a national population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: A previous study reported significant excess mortality among non-COVID-19 patients due to disrupted surgical care caused by resource prioritization for COVID-19 cases in France. The primary objective was to investigate if a similar impact occurred for medical conditions and determine the effect of hospital saturation on non-COVID-19 hospital mortality during the first year of the pandemic in France. METHODS: We conducted a nationwide population-based cohort study including all adult patients hospitalized for non-COVID-19 acute medical conditions in France between March 1, 2020 and 31 May, 2020 (1st wave) and September 1, 2020 and December 31, 2020 (2nd wave). Hospital saturation was categorized into four levels based on weekly bed occupancy for COVID-19: no saturation (< 5%), low saturation (> 5% and ≤ 15%), moderate saturation (> 15% and ≤ 30%), and high saturation (> 30%). Multivariate generalized linear model analyzed the association between hospital saturation and mortality with adjustment for age, sex, COVID-19 wave, Charlson Comorbidity Index, case-mix, source of hospital admission, ICU admission, category of hospital and region of residence. RESULTS: A total of 2,264,871 adult patients were hospitalized for acute medical conditions. In the multivariate analysis, the hospital mortality was significantly higher in low saturated hospitals (adjusted Odds Ratio/aOR = 1.05, 95% CI [1.34-1.07], P < .001), moderate saturated hospitals (aOR = 1.12, 95% CI [1.09-1.14], P < .001), and highly saturated hospitals (aOR = 1.25, 95% CI [1.21-1.30], P < .001) compared to non-saturated hospitals. The proportion of deaths outside ICU was higher in highly saturated hospitals (87%) compared to non-, low- or moderate saturated hospitals (81-84%). The negative impact of hospital saturation on mortality was more pronounced in patients older than 65 years, those with fewer comorbidities (Charlson 1-2 and 3 vs. 0), patients with cancer, nervous and mental diseases, those admitted from home or through the emergency room (compared to transfers from other hospital wards), and those not admitted to the intensive care unit. CONCLUSIONS: Our study reveals a noteworthy "dose-effect" relationship: as hospital saturation intensifies, the non-COVID-19 hospital mortality risk also increases. These results raise concerns regarding hospitals' resilience and patient safety, underscoring the importance of identifying targeted strategies to enhance resilience for the future, particularly for high-risk patients.

Psychometric Assessment of an Item Bank for Adaptive Testing on Patient-Reported Experience of Care Environment for Severe Mental Illness: Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: The care environment significantly influences the experiences of patients with severe mental illness and the quality of their care. While a welcoming and stimulating environment enhances patient satisfaction and health outcomes, psychiatric facilities often prioritize staff workflow over patient needs. Addressing these challenges is crucial to improving patient experiences and outcomes in mental health care. OBJECTIVE: This study is part of the Patient-Reported Experience Measure for Improving Quality of Care in Mental Health (PREMIUM) project and aims to establish an item bank (PREMIUM-CE) and to develop computerized adaptive tests (CATs) to measure the experience of the care environment of adult patients with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or major depressive disorder. METHODS: We performed psychometric analyses including assessments of item response theory (IRT) model assumptions, IRT model fit, differential item functioning (DIF), item bank validity, and CAT simulations. RESULTS: In this multicenter cross-sectional study, 498 patients were recruited from outpatient and inpatient settings. The final PREMIUM-CE 13-item bank was sufficiently unidimensional (root mean square error of approximation=0.082, 95% CI 0.067-0.097; comparative fit index=0.974; Tucker-Lewis index=0.968) and showed an adequate fit to the IRT model (infit mean square statistic ranging between 0.7 and 1.0). DIF analysis revealed no item biases according to gender, health care settings, diagnosis, or mode of study participation. PREMIUM-CE scores correlated strongly with satisfaction measures (r=0.69-0.78; P<.001) and weakly with quality-of-life measures (r=0.11-0.21; P<.001). CAT simulations showed a strong correlation (r=0.98) between CAT scores and those of the full item bank, and around 79.5% (396/498) of the participants obtained a reliable score with the administration of an average of 7 items. CONCLUSIONS: The PREMIUM-CE item bank and its CAT version have shown excellent psychometric properties, making them reliable measures for evaluating the patient experience of the care environment among adults with severe mental illness in both outpatient and inpatient settings. These measures are a valuable addition to the existing landscape of patient experience assessment, capturing what truly matters to patients and enhancing the understanding of their care experiences. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02491866; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02491866.

Enhancing patient experience assessment with psychological care in severe mental disorders: A study of the PREMIUM program.

Incorporating the experiences of patients with severe mental disorders (SMD) into clinical practice offers valuable insights for optimizing psychological care's effectiveness with more patient-centered and personalized interventions. The study aimed to develop a patient-reported experience measure regarding psychological care (PREMIUM-PSY) using adaptive testing and investigate its association with quality of life. In a multicenter study involving 443 patients with SMD, PREMIUM-PSY demonstrated both validity and efficiency (6-item average). Positive patient experiences were associated with enhanced mental and physical quality of life (ß = 3.15[2.17;4.12], p < 0.001 and ß = 1.18[0.04;2.32], p = 0.042), suggesting PREMIUM-PSY's potential for optimizing psychological care outcomes.

Development of the PREMIUM computerized adaptive testing for measuring the access and care coordination for patients with severe mental illness.

Severe mental illness (SMI) patients often have complex health needs, which makes it difficult to access and coordinate their care. This study aimed to develop a computerized adaptive testing (CAT) tool, PREMIUM CAT-ACC, to measure SMI patients' experience with access and care coordination. This multicenter and cross-sectional study included 496 adult in- and out-patients with SMI (i.e., schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or major depressive disorder). Psychometric analysis of the 13-item bank showed adequate properties, with preliminary evidence of external validity and no substantial differential item functioning for sex, age, care setting, and diagnosis, making it suitable for CAT administration. A post-hoc CAT simulation demonstrated that the tool was efficient and accurate, with an average of seven items, compared to the full item bank administration. Its use by clinicians can contribute to optimizing patient care pathways and transitioning towards more person-centered healthcare.