[Health care safety: The discrepancies between experience and degree of satisfaction of hospitalized patients observed in interviews performed by user representatives]

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this article is to present the results of a qualitative survey conducted by user representatives (URs) focusing on the health care safety experience of hospitalized patients. The authors wished to identify factors associated with safety of care and, more specifically, with the possibly ominous medical events reported by patients.

METHODS

After being trained with these objectives in mind, eight URs conducted semi-directive interviews with fourteen patients hospitalized in eleven separate hospital units in nine different hospitals.

RESULTS

Eight types of factors consisting in 30 contributing factors liable to be reported by patients were identified: 1) factors related to patients' basic needs; 2) personalization of care; 3) professional factors; 4) organizational factors; 5) communication factors; 6) caregiver responsiveness; 7) infectious risks; 8) continuity of care. Patients' overall feelings about their hospitalization remained excellent notwithstanding more tempered, even negative experiences.

CONCLUSION

This paradoxical result shows that the patients' actual experience is far more instructive than their degree of satisfaction. In light of this study, the acceptability of this type of research (i.e. research conducted by URs) is excellent and it also appears highly feasible, whatever the limitations imposed by organizational considerations.

Emergency laparotomy research methodology: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with poorer clinical outcomes than similar procedures in the elective setting. Research into emergency laparotomy (EL) care is moving from observational studies which simply measure EL outcomes to interventional research evaluating the implementation of care strategies designed to improve the quality and outcomes from EL care. There is no consensus as to the optimal approach to conducting research in this sphere. The primary objective of this review was to examine how mortality and other outcome measures were reported in previous EL research and to identify what might be the most appropriate methods in future outcome research.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA principles. Electronic databases were interrogated with a pre-specified search strategy to identify English language studies addressing outcomes from EL care. Retrieved papers were screened and assessed according to pre-defined eligibility criteria. The mortality and other outcomes reported in each paper were extracted and examined.

RESULTS

16 studies were included. They demonstrated significant heterogeneity in case definition, outcome reporting and data processing. A wide range of mortality and other outcome measures were applied and reported. Only few studies included on patient-reported outcomes measures.

CONCLUSION

The heterogeneity in EL research, demonstrated by this review must be considered when EL outcomes are compared. A standardized approach with respect to case definition, outcome measurement, and data analysis would provide for more valid and comparable evaluation of EL outcomes. Future EL research should include more patient centred outcomes.