ABSTRACT
La satisfaction des usagers des établissements sanitaires fait partie de l'appréciation de la qualité des soins. L'objectif était d'étudier la satisfaction des patients hospitalisés dans les services du département de médecine du Centre hospitalier universitaire Souro Sanou (CHUSS) de Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso. Il s'est agi d'une étude transversale à visée analytique conduite en 8 mois. Les domaines de satisfaction ont été calculés selon le modèle SAPHORA (version 7). Des 294 patients éligibles, 250 (85,0 %) patients ont été retenus dont 42,0 % de femmes. L'âge moyen des patients était de 47,1 (± 17,9) ans. Les domaines à score faible étaient : niveau global de satisfaction, accueil, communication avec le personnel, restauration et organisation de la sortie. Les patients plus âgés et ceux à durée d'hospitalisation plus longue étaient plus satisfaits. Les 94,0 % des patients sans assurance maladie étaient moins satisfaits.Les scores des domaines de satisfaction par service et le score global de satisfaction étaient inférieurs à 50,0 %. Les différences entre les services étaient en lien avec : accueil, qualité humaine du personnel, soins médicaux, hôtellerie, restauration, coûts, et niveau global de satisfaction. L'amélioration de la satisfaction des patients hospitalisés requiert le respect des besoins fondamentaux des patients et une réorganisation des services avec un personnel engagé, pour l'offre de soins et services de santé de qualité
Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers , Burkina Faso , Hospital Medicine , Inpatients , Patient Satisfaction , Quality of Health CareABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Blood tests and liver stiffness evaluation (LSE) by ultrasonographic elastometry are accurate tools for diagnosing liver fibrosis. We evaluated whether their synchronous combination in new scores could improve the diagnostic accuracy and reduce liver biopsy requirement in algorithm. METHODS: Three hundred and ninety patients with chronic liver disease of miscellaneous causes were included. Five blood fibrosis tests were evaluated: APRI, FIB-4, Hepascore, Fibrotest and FibroMeter. The reference was fibrosis Metavir staging. RESULTS: Diagnosis of significant fibrosis (Metavir F>or=2). The most accurate synchronous combination was FibroMeter+LSE, which provided a significantly higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.892) than LSE alone (0.867, P=0.011) or Fibrometer (0.834, P<10(-3)). An algorithm using the FibroMeter+LSE combination and then a liver biopsy in indeterminate cases had 91.9% diagnostic accuracy and required significantly fewer biopsies (20.2%) than previously published Bordeaux algorithm (28.6%, P=0.02) or sequential algorithm for fibrosis evaluation (SAFE) (55.7%, P<10(-3)). The Angers algorithm performance was not significantly different between viral hepatitis and other causes. Diagnosis of cirrhosis. The most accurate synchronous combination was LSE+FibroMeter, which provided >or=90% predictive values for cirrhosis in 90.6% of patients vs 87.4% for LSE (P=0.02) and 57.9% for FibroMeter (P<10(-3)). An algorithm including the LSE+FibroMeter combination, and then a liver biopsy in indeterminate cases, had a significantly higher diagnostic accuracy than the SAFE algorithm (91.0 vs 79.8%, P<10(-3)), and required significantly fewer biopsies than the Bordeaux algorithm (9.3 vs 25.3%, P<10(-3)). CONCLUSION: The synchronous combination of a blood test plus LSE improves the accuracy of the non-invasive diagnosis of liver fibrosis and, consequently, markedly decreases the biopsy requirement in the diagnostic algorithm, notably to <10% in cirrhosis diagnosis.
Subject(s)
Elasticity Imaging Techniques/methods , Liver Cirrhosis/diagnosis , Adult , Aged , Algorithms , Biopsy , Female , Hematologic Tests , Humans , Liver/pathology , Liver Cirrhosis/blood , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Sensitivity and SpecificityABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Fibroscan allows liver stiffness examination (LSE) that is well correlated with fibrosis stages. Our main objective was to evaluate LSE learning curve. METHODS: LSE results of five novice observers with different medical status were compared with those of five expert observers (physicians with >100 examinations) in 250 patients with chronic liver disease. Each novice-expert pair had to blindly examine 50 consecutive patients divided into five consecutive subgroups of 10 patients. RESULTS: In each observer group, novice-expert agreement [intraclass correlation coefficient (Ric)] for LSE results was excellent from the first to the last subgroup. Novice-expert agreement for LSE results varied with liver stiffness level: <9 kPa: Ric=0.49; >or=9 kPa: Ric=0.87. Relative difference (%) between novice and expert LSE results was independently associated with the number of valid LSE measurements, and stabilizes around 20-30% after the fourth valid measurement. In each observer group, novice-expert agreement (Ric) for LSE success rate progressively increased as a function of time. CONCLUSION: LSE requires no learning curve: a novice is able to obtain a reliable result after a single training session, whatever the professional status. However, success rate will progressively increase. An LSE with less than four valid measurements should not be considered as reliable.
