Circulando hacia la seguridad del paciente: realidad y deseo / The road to patient safety: facts and desire

Objetivo: Valorar diferencias entre necesidad e implementación de prácticas seguras recomendadas para la seguridad del paciente y utilidad del uso de señales de tráfico para promover su implementación. Método: El estudio constó de dos fases: 1) revisión de recomendaciones sobre prácticas seguras de diferentes organizaciones y 2) encuesta a una muestra de oportunidad de profesionales del ámbito asistencial, organizativo y académico de la seguridad del paciente de España y Latinoamérica para evaluar necesidad y la implementación percibida de las prácticas seguras y la utilidad de las señales para tal fin. Resultados: Se recibieron 365 cuestionarios. Todas las prácticas seguras identificadas fueron valoradas como necesarias (media y límite inferior del intervalo de confianza por encima de 3 sobre 5 puntos). Sin embargo, la implementación se valoró como insuficiente en seis de ellas: escritura ilegible, conciliación de medicación, estandarización de comunicación, sistemas de alerta rápida, aplicación de procedimientos por profesionales o equipos entrenados, y cumplimiento de voluntades del paciente al final de la vida. Mejorar cumplimiento de la higiene de manos, aplicación de precauciones de barrera, asegurar la identificación correcta de los pacientes y utilizar listados de verificación fueron las cuatro prácticas en las que más del 75% de los encuestados encuentran mayor grado de consenso sobre la utilidad de las señales de tráfico para mejorar su implementación. Conclusiones: Las diferencias entre necesidad percibida e implementación real de las prácticas seguras consideradas indican áreas de mejora. El lenguaje común de las señales de tráfico es un instrumento sencillo para mejorar su cumplimiento

Objective: To evaluate differences between the need and degree of implementation of safe practices recommended for patient safety and to check the usefulness of traffic sign iconicity to promote their implementation. Method: The study was developed in two stages: 1) review of safe practices recommended by different organizations and 2) a survey to assess the perceptions for the need and implementation of them and the usefulness of signs to improve their implementation. The sample consisted of professionals from Spain and Latin America working in healthcare settings and in the academic field related to patient safety. Results: 365 questionnaires were collected. All safe practices included were considered necessary (mean and lower limit of confidence interval over 3 out of 5 points). However, in six of the patient safety practices evaluated the implementation was considered insufficient: illegible handwriting, medication reconciliation, standardization of communication systems, early warning systems, procedures performed or equipment used only by trained people, and compliance with patient preferences at the end of life. Improve compliance of with hand hygiene and barrier precautions to prevent infections, ensure the correct identification of patients and the use of checklists are the four practices in which more than 75% of respondents found a high degree of consensus on the usefulness of traffic sings to broaden their use. Conclusion: The differences between perceived need and actual implementation in some safe practices indicate areas for improvement in patient safety. With this aim, the common language and the iconicity of traffic signs could constitute a simple instrument to improve compliance with safe practices for patient safety

[The road to patient safety: facts and desire]. / Circulando hacia la seguridad del paciente: realidad y deseo.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate differences between the need and degree of implementation of safe practices recommended for patient safety and to check the usefulness of traffic sign iconicity to promote their implementation. METHOD: The study was developed in two stages: 1) review of safe practices recommended by different organizations and 2) a survey to assess the perceptions for the need and implementation of them and the usefulness of signs to improve their implementation. The sample consisted of professionals from Spain and Latin America working in healthcare settings and in the academic field related to patient safety. RESULTS: 365 questionnaires were collected. All safe practices included were considered necessary (mean and lower limit of confidence interval over 3 out of 5 points). However, in six of the patient safety practices evaluated the implementation was considered insufficient: illegible handwriting, medication reconciliation, standardization of communication systems, early warning systems, procedures performed or equipment used only by trained people, and compliance with patient preferences at the end of life. Improve compliance of with hand hygiene and barrier precautions to prevent infections, ensure the correct identification of patients and the use of checklists are the four practices in which more than 75% of respondents found a high degree of consensus on the usefulness of traffic sings to broaden their use. CONCLUSION: The differences between perceived need and actual implementation in some safe practices indicate areas for improvement in patient safety. With this aim, the common language and the iconicity of traffic signs could constitute a simple instrument to improve compliance with safe practices for patient safety.