RESUMO
The association between patient experience and the quality of hospital care is controversial. We assess the association between clinical outcomes and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) in hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Knowledge on this issue informs value-based health-care reforms. A retrospective observational study was conducted in 17 hospitals in Saudi Arabia during the period of 2019-22. Hospital data were collected on PREMs, mortality, readmission, length of stay (LOS), central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI), catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI), and surgical site infection. Descriptive analysis was used to describe hospital characteristics. Spearman's rho correlation tests were used to assess the correlation between these measures, and multivariate generalized linear mixed model regression analysis was used to study associations while controlling for hospital characteristics and year. Our analysis showed that PREMs were negatively correlated with hospital readmission rate (r = -0.332, P ≤ .01), LOS (r = -0.299, P ≤ .01), CLABSI (r = -0.297, P ≤ .01), CAUTI (r = -0.393, P ≤ .01), and surgical site infection (r = -0.298, P ≤ .01). The results indicated that CAUTI and LOS converged negatively with PREMs (ß = -0.548, P = .005; ß = -0.873, P = .008, respectively) and that larger hospitals tended to have better patient experience scores (ß =0.009, P = .003). Our findings suggest that better performance in clinical outcomes is associated with higher PREM scores. PREMs are not a substitute or surrogate for clinical quality. Yet, PREMs are complementary to other objective measures of patient-reported outcomes, the process of care, and clinical outcomes.
Assuntos
Infecções Relacionadas a Cateter , Infecção Hospitalar , Infecções Urinárias , Humanos , Infecção Hospitalar/epidemiologia , Infecções Relacionadas a Cateter/epidemiologia , Infecção da Ferida Cirúrgica , Hospitais , Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo PacienteRESUMO
BACKGROUND: This systematic literature review identifies hospital value-based healthcare quality measures, measurement practices, and tools, as well as potential strategies for improving cardiovascular diseases and cancer care. METHODS: A systematic search was carried out in the PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and MEDLINE (OvidSP) databases. We included studies on quality measures in hospital value-based healthcare for cardiovascular diseases and cancer. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, conducted a full-text review of potentially relevant articles, assessed the quality of included studies, and extracted data thematically. This review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, and four validated tools were used for methodological quality assessment. RESULTS: The search yielded 2860 publications. After screening the titles and abstracts, 60 articles were retrieved for full-text review. A total of 37 studies met our inclusion criteria. We found that standardized outcome sets with patient involvement were developed for some cardiovascular diseases and cancer. Despite the heterogeneity in outcome measures, there was consensus to include clinical outcomes on survival rate and disease control, disutility of care, and patient-reported outcome measures such as long-term quality of life. CONCLUSION: Hospitals that developed value-based healthcare or are planning to do so can choose whether they prefer to implement the standardized outcomes step-by-step, collect additional measures, or develop their own set of measures. However, they need to ensure that their performance can be consistently compared to that of their peers and that they measure what prioritizes and maximizes value for their patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ID: CRD42021229763 .
Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares , Neoplasias , Doenças Cardiovasculares/terapia , Atenção à Saúde , Hospitais , Humanos , Neoplasias/terapia , Qualidade de VidaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Measuring patient safety culture can provide insight into areas for improvement and help monitor changes over time. This study details the findings of a re-assessment of patient safety culture in a multi-site Medical City in Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Results were compared to an earlier assessment conducted in 2012 and benchmarked with regional and international studies. Such assessments can provide hospital leadership with insight on how their hospital is performing on patient safety culture composites as a result of quality improvement plans. This paper also explored the association between patient safety culture predictors and patient safety grade, perception of patient safety, frequency of events reported and number of events reported. METHODS: We utilized a customized version of the patient safety culture survey developed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The Medical City is a tertiary care teaching facility composed of two sites (total capacity of 904 beds). Data was analyzed using SPSS 24 at a significance level of 0.05. A t-Test was used to compare results from the 2012 survey to that conducted in 2015. Two adopted Generalized Estimating Equations in addition to two linear models were used to assess the association between composites and patient safety culture outcomes. Results were also benchmarked against similar initiatives in Lebanon, Palestine and USA. RESULTS: Areas of strength in 2015 included Teamwork within units, and Organizational Learning-Continuous Improvement; areas requiring improvement included Non-Punitive Response to Error, and Staffing. Comparing results to the 2012 survey revealed improvement on some areas but non-punitive response to error and Staffing remained the lowest scoring composites in 2015. Regression highlighted significant association between managerial support, organizational learning and feedback and improved survey outcomes. Comparison to international benchmarks revealed that the hospital is performing at or better than benchmark on several composites. CONCLUSION: The Medical City has made significant progress on several of the patient safety culture composites despite still having areas requiring additional improvement. Patient safety culture outcomes are evidently linked to better performance on specific composites. While results are comparable with regional and international benchmarks, findings confirm that regular assessment can allow hospitals to better understand and visualize changes in their performance and identify additional areas for improvement.
Assuntos
Benchmarking/normas , Segurança do Paciente , Gestão da Segurança/normas , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Hospitais/normas , Humanos , Relações Interprofissionais , Líbano , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Cultura Organizacional , Equipe de Assistência ao Paciente/organização & administração , Equipe de Assistência ao Paciente/normas , Melhoria de Qualidade , Gestão da Segurança/organização & administração , Arábia Saudita , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To inform the stepwise transformation to value-based healthcare in Saudi Arabia, we assess physicians' priorities for measuring general patient outcomes. This is done as an initial step toward the implementation of disease-specific outcome sets. METHODS: A cross-sectional, electronic self-administered questionnaire-based study among physicians in 6 hospitals in Saudi Arabia was conducted between March 2022 and May 2022. Purposive sampling was used to select hospitals and physicians. The questionnaire included 30 health outcomes taken from about 60 disease-specific outcome sets. These were classified into 6 domains per the Outcome Measures Hierarchy Framework of Michael Porter. The physicians were asked to prioritize outcomes in each domain by their order of importance. The Relative Importance Index (RII) and multivariate binary logistic regression were used to analyze the priorities and to relate them to physicians' characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 204 physicians completed the questionnaire accounting for 40% response rate. The top priority outcomes per domain were overall survival (RII 89.4%); quality of life (RII 92.4%); time to treatment (RII 90.8%); incidence of adverse effects (RII 72.9%); need for retreatment (RII 80.5%); and incidence of hospital-acquired infections (RII 89.3%). Regression analysis revealed that physician seniority is a characteristic associated with physicians' perceptions of the importance of measuring health outcomes (highest odds ratio 2.693; 95% CI 1.501-4.833; P = .001). CONCLUSION: Establishing a general set of the most important outcomes that applies to all patients, including survival and mortality, quality of life, adverse events, and complications, need to be considered in the early stages of hospitals' transformation to value-based healthcare.
Assuntos
Médicos , Qualidade de Vida , Humanos , Arábia Saudita/epidemiologia , Estudos Transversais , Cuidados de Saúde Baseados em ValoresRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: This study examines how the results of the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture changed between 2012 and 2019 and identifies organisational factors affecting these changes. DESIGN: The study combined the use of quantitative surveys of staff and qualitative interviews with hospital leadership. Secondary data analysis was performed for previous surveys. SETTING: This study was conducted in a tertiary care teaching multisite hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. PARTICIPANTS: One thousand hospital staff participated in the survey. Thirty-one executive board members and directors and four focus groups of frontliners were qualitatively interviewed. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Twelve safety culture dimensions were assessed to study the patient safety culture as perceived by the healthcare professionals. An additional semi-structured interview was conducted to identify organisational factors, changes, and barriers affecting the patient safety culture. Furthermore, suggestions to improve patient safety were proposed. RESULTS: Comparing the results revealed a general positive trend in scores from 2012 to 2019. The areas of strength included teamwork within and across units, organisational learning, managerial support, overall perception of safety and feedback and communication about error. Non-punitive response to error, staffing and communication and openness consistently remain the lowest-scoring composites. Interview results revealed that organisational changes may have influenced the answers of the participants on some survey composites. CONCLUSIONS: Patient safety is a moving target with areas for improvement that are continuously identified. Effective quality improvement initiatives can lead to visible changes in the patient safety culture in a hospital, and consistent leadership commitment and support can maintain these improvements.