Are Spanish primary care professionals aware of patient safety?

BACKGROUND: Knowledge about safety culture improves patient safety (PS) in health-care organizations. The first contact a patient has with health care occurs at the primary level. We conducted a survey to measure patient safety culture (PSC) among primary care professionals (PCPs) of health centres (HCs) in Spain and analyzed PS dimensions that influence PSC. METHODS: We used Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Medical Office Survey on Patient Safety Culture translated and validated into Spanish to conduct a cross-sectional anonymous postal survey. We randomly selected a sample of 8378 PCPs at 289 HCs operated by 17 Regional Health Services. Statistical analysis was performed on sociodemographic variables, survey items, PS dimensions and a patient safety synthetic index (PSSI), calculated as average score of the items per dimension, to identify potential predictors of PSC. We used AHRQ data to conduct international comparison. RESULTS: A total of 4344 PCPs completed the questionnaire. The response rate was 55.69%. Forty-two percent were general practitioners, 34.9% nurses, 18% administrative staff and 4.9% other professionals. The highest scoring dimension was 'PS and quality issues' 4.18 (4.1-4.20) 'Work pressure and pace' was the lowest scored dimension with 2.76 (2.74-2.79). Professionals over 55 years, with managerial responsibilities, women, nurses and administrative staff, had better PSSI scores. Professionals with more than 1500 patients and working for more than 11 years at primary care had lower PSSI scores. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first national study to measure PSC in primary care in Spain. Results may reflect on-going efforts to build a strong PSC. Further research into its association with safety outcomes and patients' perceptions is required.

[Validation of a questionnaire to assess patient safety culture in Spanish Primary Health Care professionals]. / Validación de un cuestionario para evaluar la cultura de seguridad del paciente de los profesionales de atención primaria en España.

OBJECTIVE: [corrected] To validate a tool to measure patient safety culture in Spanish primary care professionals. METHODS: Medical Office Survey on Patient Safety Culture (MOSPSC), from the Agency for Healthcare and Research in Quality (AHRQ). The process has been performed in five steps: original version traslation, conceptual equivalence evaluation, acceptability and viability assessment, content validity and questionnaire test and response analysis and psichometric properties assessment. SETTING: Primary care. SUBJECTS: 185 Primary care professionals from different Spanish regions represented the sample test. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Frecuency, response pattern and discrimination power of each item. Cronbach's alpha coefficient and dimensions obtained through factor analysis. RESULTS: 17, 8% of respondents answered all the items and 28, 7% of them did not answer, or answered the option "Don't know/Does not apply", to one to four items. All the sentences, with only one exception, present discrimination capacity. Cronbach's alpha coefficient results 0,96 and information is sumarized in 15 factors obtaining the same items in 7 of the total 12 factors in the original questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: Traslated, adapted, extended and validated AHRQ questionnaire is, in this setting, a reliable and useful instrument and it must be used for international comparisons.

Addressing Acute Stress among Professionals Caring for COVID-19 Patients: Lessons Learned during the First Outbreak in Spain (March-April 2020).

Objectives: To describe lessons learned during the first COVID-19 outbreak in developing urgent interventions to strengthen healthcare workers' capacity to cope with acute stress caused by health care pressure, concern about becoming infected, despair of witnessing patients' suffering, and critical decision-making requirements of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic during the first outbreak in Spain. Methods: A task force integrated by healthcare professionals and academics was activated following the first observations of acute stress reactions starting to compromise the professionals' capacity for caring COVID-19 patients. Literature review and qualitative approach (consensus techniques) were applied. The target population included health professionals in primary care, hospitals, emergencies, and nursing homes. Interventions designed for addressing acute stress were agreed and disseminated. Findings: There are similarities in stressors to previous outbreaks, and the solutions devised then may work now. A set of issues, interventions to cope with, and their levels of evidence were defined. Issues and interventions were classified as: adequate communication initiative to strengthen work morale (avoiding information blackouts, uniformity of criteria, access to updated information, mentoring new professionals); resilience and recovery from physical and mental fatigue (briefings, protecting the family, regulated recovery time during the day, psychological first aid, humanizing care); reinforce leadership of intermediate commands (informative leadership, transparency, realism, and positive messages, the current state of emergency has not allowed for an empirical analysis of the effectiveness of proposed interventions. Sharing information to gauge expectations, listening to what professionals need, feeling protected from threats, organizational flexibility, encouraging teamwork, and leadership that promotes psychological safety have led to more positive responses. Attention to the needs of individuals must be combined with caring for the teams responsible for patient care. Conclusions: Although the COVID-19 pandemic has a more devastating effect than other recent outbreaks, there are common stressors and lessons learned in all of them that we must draw on to increase our capacity to respond to future healthcare crises.

An Acute Stress Scale for Health Care Professionals Caring for Patients With COVID-19: Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the response capacity of the health care workforce, and health care professionals have been experiencing acute stress reactions since the beginning of the pandemic. In Spain, the first wave was particularly severe among the population and health care professionals, many of whom were infected. These professionals required initial psychological supports that were gradual and in line with their conditions. OBJECTIVE: In the early days of the pandemic in Spain (March 2020), this study aimed to design and validate a scale to measure acute stress experienced by the health care workforce during the care of patients with COVID-19: the Self-applied Acute Stress Scale (EASE). METHODS: Item development, scale development, and scale evaluation were considered. Qualitative research was conducted to produce the initial pool of items, assure their legibility, and assess the validity of the content. Internal consistency was calculated using Cronbach α and McDonald ω. Confirmatory factor analysis and the Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test were used to assess construct validity. Linear regression was applied to assess criterion validity. Back-translation methodology was used to translate the scale into Portuguese and English. RESULTS: A total of 228 health professionals from the Spanish public health system responded to the 10 items of the EASE scale. Internal consistency was .87 (McDonald ω). Goodness-of-fit indices confirmed a two-factor structure, explaining 55% of the variance. As expected, the highest level of stress was found among professionals working in health services where a higher number of deaths from COVID-19 occurred (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: The EASE scale was shown to have adequate metric properties regarding consistency and construct validity. The EASE scale could be used to determine the levels of acute stress among the health care workforce in order to give them proportional support according to their needs during emergency conditions, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

[Not Available]. / Qué opinan los pacientes de la e-medicina. Un estudio cualitativo.

OBJECTIVE: To find out patients' opinions of e-medicine, obtaining general ideas related to three relevant aspects: electronic health records (EHR), the web as an information source and use of e-mail. DESIGN: Qualitative phenomenological study, analysing the content of group interviews. Content analysis was performed by the three researchers. PARTICIPANTS: Urban patients. Internet and e-mail practical knowledge. VARIABLES: age and gender, districts with different socio-economic levels. SETTING: San Sebastián (Spain). RESULTS: Four focal groups, with 35 people, 12 under 25 years old, 10 over 65, and 16 women. EHR valuation was very positive. Computer use does not change the health worker-patient relationship. It must spread to the home setting, and be available from any point, creating another kind of relationship, regardless of the distance. Single EHR for all the suppliers. Patients consider themselves authorised to manipulate it. Participants use the web as an information source, looking for safe sources and specific information, and to verify health workers information. The relationship with doctors is irreplaceable. E-mail is a useful alternative for specific needs. It would force a redesign of working schedule and to define the conditions of use. CONCLUSIONS: New technologies are widely used. Acceptance is practically unanimous. Ideas such as continuous care by the same person are very innovative. It seems that we are faced with a powerful technology, which could improve and facilitate patient care, as patient awareness of their individual rights coincides with unlimited access to the information.

[Qualitative analysis of the perception of people who participate in a clinical trial, Navarra]. / Análisis cualitativo de la percepción que tienen las personas que participan en un ensayo clínico, Navarra.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to explore the perception that participants in a clinical trial have about the information disclosured by the physician, during patient recruitment and along the study as a preliminary stage for drafting a questionnaire. METHODS: Qualitative study by means of quasi-structure interviews to subjects of different features taken from a patients list obtained by randomized selection of participants in clinical trials approved within the 1998-1999 period. For conducting the interviews, a guide was prepared based on the recommendations of the Helsinki Declaration. RESULTS: Six (6) interviews were held with 7 individuals, as one married couple was interviewed. Most of the categories encountered belonged to the Helsinki Declaration. In addition, others being related to the fulfillment of expectations and to the balance of the risks/benefits done by the individuals for deciding to take part in the study. CONCLUSIONS: The patients were acceptably informed of the most points dealt with under the Helsinki Declaration. The existence of lacking areas having a major impact on the fulfillment of their expectations however having been revealed.

[To establish nurse research priorities in Spain: Delphi study]. / Establecimiento de prioridades de investigación en enfermería en España: estudio Delphi.

OBJECTIVE: To identify nursing research priorities in Spain as suggested by nurses and service users. METHOD: A Modified Delphi technique was used. The first round started off with a 24-item document for which consensus had been previously achieved. Experts participating in this modified (two rounds) Delphi technique were: nursing managers (community and hospital care settings), nursing school directors, scientific nursing association representatives, nursing researchers attending the National Nursing Research Conference, and service users. RESULTS: Main priorities identified for nursing research were: 1) evaluating the effectiveness of nursing interventions, 2) identifying strategies for health promotion empowering service users, 3) developing evidence-based care through implementing and evaluating results, and 4) evaluating the quality of nursing care. CONCLUSIONS: Results may help research managers and administrators identify and develop nursing research promotion strategies as well as more strongly sustained funding policies and decisions.