Exploring patient participation in reducing health-care-related safety risks

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Fig. 5.1. Number of medicines per patient per day .................................................. 81 Fig. 5.2. Relationship between patients’ knowledge and the number of medicines taken ................................................................................................ 82 Fig. 5.3. Frequency with which doctors inquire about medication history .............. 83 Fig. 5.4. Frequency with which patients ask about interactions between OTC and prescription medicines ............................................................................... 83 Fig. 5.5. Most important risk factors regarding drug prescribing, according to doctors.............................................................................................................. 84 Fig. 5.6. Relationship between specialization and importance of risk factors .......... 85 Fig. 5.7. Number of simultaneously taken medicines for which the risk of interaction is certain, according to doctors ....................................................... 86 Fig. 5.8. Frequency of reporting ADRs to designated authorities by doctors’ degree of specialization .................................................................................... 86 Fig. 7.1. Patient experiences with safety management – inpatient hospital care in the Netherlands, 2009 .......................................................................... 128 Fig. 7.2. Clients experiencing competent and safe care – nursing homes and home care in the Netherlands, 2006 ................................................................. 129 Fig. 7.3. Inpatient experiences in NHS hospitals, 2010 ........................................... 130 Boxes Box 1.1. WHO Patient Safety Programme ............................................................. 2 Box 4.1. Definitions of adverse effects and incidents in French law ........................ 51 Box 4.2. List of questions asked during expert interviews ....................................... 58 Box 4.3. Experts’ main suggestions to improve information provided to patients on blood transfusion ........................................................................... 64 Box 4.4. Experts’ main suggestions to increase patient involvement ........................ 66 Box 6.1. Examples of instruments that help patients to be involved in safe surgery ....................................................................................................... 108 Box 7.1. “Patients for Patient Safety” – action area of the WHO World Alliance for Patient Safety ............................................................................... 119 Box 7.2. Examples of degree and frequency foci in questions .................................. 123 Box 8.1. The limits of the law .................................................................................. 144 Box 8.2. Curricula and CME .................................................................................. 145 Box 8.3. Public consumer information .................................................................... 146 Box 8.4. Patient education ....................................................................................... 149 Box A3.1. Reporting procedure ............................................................................... 157 Box A3.2. Categories of reactions ............................................................................ 158 vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The editors would like to express appreciation to all those who contributed to the production of this document. Particular thanks for valuable input and advice during the development of the conceptual background of the project leading to this publication go to Professor Niek Klazinga, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Authors » Paul Barach, European HANDOVER project, University of Utrecht, the Netherlands » Justine Bettinger, Department of Human and Social Sciences and Health Behaviour, French School of Public Health, France » Yves Charpak, Director of Survey and Prospective, French Blood Transfusion Organization, France » Diana Delnoij, Tilburg School of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Tilburg University, the Netherlands » Valentina Hafner, Division of Health Systems and Public Health, WHO Regional Office for Europe » Halina Kutaj-Wąsikowska, National Centre for Quality Assessment in Health Care, WHO collaborating centre for developing quality and safety in health systems, Poland » Barbara Kutryba, National Centre for Quality Assessment in Health Care, WHO collaborating centre for developing quality and safety in health systems, Poland » Johan Legemaate, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands » Agnes Leotsakos, Patient Safety Programme, WHO headquarters » Ana Mansoa, Central Lisbon Hospital Centre, Central Hospital de Santa Marta, Portugal » Willem Martinus Smid, Sanquin Consulting Services, the Netherlands » Josselin Thuilliez, House of Economic Sciences, Sorbonne Economic Centre, France » Erica van der Schrieck-de Loos, Netherlands Institute for Healthcare Improvement, the Netherlands » Rossitza Vatcheva-Dobrevska, National Reference Centre for Healthcare- Associated Infections, National Centre for Infectious and Parasitic Diseases, Bulgaria » Andrzej Warunek, National Centre for Quality Assessment in Health Care, WHO collaborating centre for developing quality and safety in health systems, Poland » Jarosław Woroń, National Centre for Quality Assessment in Health Care, WHO collaborating centre for developing quality and safety in health systems, Poland Expanded expert group (also contributing to selected chapter reviews) » Benedetta Allegranzi, Patient Safety Programme, WHO headquarters » Anja Esther Baumann, Division of Noncommunicable Diseases and Health Promotion, WHO Regional Office for Europe Acknowledgements ix
Page 1 and 2: Exploring patient participation in
Page 3 and 4: ABSTRACT Patients’ rights have be
Page 5 and 6: iv Patient information: the link be
Page 7: vi LIST OF TABLES, FIGURES AND BOXE
Page 11 and 12: LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ABHR alcohol-
Page 13 and 14: FOREWORD Health is a social value a
Page 15 and 16: ChApTER 1. pATIENTS’ RIGhTS AND p
Page 17 and 18: Box 1 .1 . contd Reporting and Lear
Page 19 and 20: The causal mechanisms through which
Page 21 and 22: » be involved in routine monitorin
Page 23 and 24: elationships within the complex env
Page 25 and 26: ChApTER 2. pATIENTS’ RIGhTS AND p
Page 27 and 28: CoE Recommendation 2006/7 of the Co
Page 29 and 30: The 2005 United States act on patie
Page 31 and 32: The right to participate in policy-
Page 33 and 34: The right to participate in quality
Page 35 and 36: » engaging with patient representa
Page 37 and 38: hampered by the written and spoken
Page 39 and 40: prevents misunderstandings and shap
Page 41 and 42: Health care providers should nevert
Page 43 and 44: Recommendation 7 - Encourage the av
Page 45 and 46: 20. Constitution of the World Healt
Page 47 and 48: ChApTER 3. pATIENT pARTICIpATION IN
Page 49 and 50: awareness of the sociomedical burde
Page 51 and 52: Patient participation in hand hygie
Page 59 and 60:
Patient participation in hand hygie
Page 61 and 62:
Blood transfusion safety in France:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Box 4 .1 . Definitions of adverse e
Page 67 and 68:
Fig . 4 .4 . Distribution of advers
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
The heterogeneity of situations and
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Fig . 4 .12 . Patients’ response
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Patient safety, rights and medicati
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Fig . 5 .3 . Frequency with which d
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
ChApTER 6. pATIENT pARTICIpATION IN
Page 109 and 110:
Patient participation in elective s
Page 111 and 112:
e desirable to have a special statu
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
inspections of surgical services to
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
» being involved in monitoring and
Page 135 and 136:
Other studies on patient attitudes
Page 137 and 138:
Information about patients’ exper
Page 139 and 140:
available evidence suggests that in
Page 141 and 142:
Adverse events Respondents from the
Page 143 and 144:
Feeling safe Five per cent of hospi
Page 145 and 146:
probability proportional to populat
Page 147 and 148:
care professionals’ and patients
Page 149 and 150:
group recommends that patient invol
Page 151 and 152:
13. Hibbard JH et al. Can patients
Page 153 and 154:
52. Triemstra M et al. Measuring cl
Page 155 and 156:
2009 (http://www.bradfordresearch.n
Page 157 and 158:
of a small-scale patient survey add
Page 159 and 160:
Box 8 .2 . Curricula and CME Chapte
Page 161 and 162:
is provided through interaction of
Page 163 and 164:
Box 8 .4 . Patient education Chapte
Page 165 and 166:
ANNEX 1. QUOTATIONS FROM INTERNATIO
Page 167 and 168:
(2) When designing adverse event re
Page 169 and 170:
17) If yes, do you think this was m
Page 171 and 172:
Box A3 .1 . Reporting procedure Pat
Page 173 and 174:
Box A3 .2 . contd Haemosiderosis Ha
Page 175 and 176:
ANNEX 4. pATIENT QUESTIONNAIRE ABOU
Page 177 and 178:
ANNEX 6. WhO pATIENT SAFETY pROGRAM
Page 179 and 180:
especially those in intensive care.
Page 181 and 182:
ANNEX 7. hANDOVER pROjECT Paul Bara
Page 183 and 184:
(a) Provide new insight into the ro
Page 185 and 186:
Johnson J, Barach P. Handovers of p
Page 187 and 188:
Enhancing the patients’ role in p
Page 189 and 190:
Enhancing the patients’ role in p
show all

Exploring patient participation in reducing health-care-related safety risks

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?