Perception of the Disclosure of Adverse Events in a Latin American Culture: A National Survey.

Thiago Gomes Romano, Joao Gabriel Rosa Ramos, Viviane Martins Almeida, Helidea de Oliveira Lima, Rodolpho Pedro
{"title":"Perception of the Disclosure of Adverse Events in a Latin American Culture: A National Survey.","authors":"Thiago Gomes Romano,&nbsp;Joao Gabriel Rosa Ramos,&nbsp;Viviane Martins Almeida,&nbsp;Helidea de Oliveira Lima,&nbsp;Rodolpho Pedro","doi":"10.36401/JQSH-22-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Adverse events are common and are responsible for a significant burden in the healthcare setting. Such issues can vary according to the local culture and relevant policies. The current literature on the subject primarily addresses Anglo-Saxon cultures; this study focused on understanding the perception of disclosure in a middle-income country in Latin America.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this descriptive study conducted from June-August, 2021, an online self-administered survey about disclosure practice used a convenience sample of 995 Brazilian healthcare professionals.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Based on two different outcomes presented following a hypothetical adverse event (outcome 1: death; outcome 2: no permanent damage), 77.9% of participants fully agree that disclosure should be performed in both scenarios. Although 67.1% claimed that disclosure changes the perception of the institution by those involved, only 8.3% fully agree that there would be a reduction in trust regarding the institution. Despite only 11.5% of participants fully agreeing that disclosure increases the chance of legal action against professionals and institutions, 92.7% fully or partially agree that judicialization was possible in scenario 1, and 72.4% agree it was possible in scenario 2. Of the participants, 64.2% claimed they already faced a \"disclosure\" situation, and 44.3% fully believe that the person directly involved in the adverse event should participate in the disclosure.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this sample of professionals from a middle-income country in Latin America, the practice of disclosure was considered ethical, and the majority of respondents affirmed that it should always be performed. Nonetheless, this call for transparency collides with participants' perception of a higher risk of legal action when disclosure is performed after a negative outcome situation.</p>","PeriodicalId":73170,"journal":{"name":"Global journal on quality and safety in healthcare","volume":"5 3","pages":"47-55"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/d6/78/i2589-9449-5-3-47.PMC10228999.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global journal on quality and safety in healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36401/JQSH-22-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction: Adverse events are common and are responsible for a significant burden in the healthcare setting. Such issues can vary according to the local culture and relevant policies. The current literature on the subject primarily addresses Anglo-Saxon cultures; this study focused on understanding the perception of disclosure in a middle-income country in Latin America.

Methods: In this descriptive study conducted from June-August, 2021, an online self-administered survey about disclosure practice used a convenience sample of 995 Brazilian healthcare professionals.

Results: Based on two different outcomes presented following a hypothetical adverse event (outcome 1: death; outcome 2: no permanent damage), 77.9% of participants fully agree that disclosure should be performed in both scenarios. Although 67.1% claimed that disclosure changes the perception of the institution by those involved, only 8.3% fully agree that there would be a reduction in trust regarding the institution. Despite only 11.5% of participants fully agreeing that disclosure increases the chance of legal action against professionals and institutions, 92.7% fully or partially agree that judicialization was possible in scenario 1, and 72.4% agree it was possible in scenario 2. Of the participants, 64.2% claimed they already faced a "disclosure" situation, and 44.3% fully believe that the person directly involved in the adverse event should participate in the disclosure.

Conclusion: In this sample of professionals from a middle-income country in Latin America, the practice of disclosure was considered ethical, and the majority of respondents affirmed that it should always be performed. Nonetheless, this call for transparency collides with participants' perception of a higher risk of legal action when disclosure is performed after a negative outcome situation.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

拉丁美洲文化中不良事件披露的认知:一项全国性调查。
简介:不良事件是常见的,并负责在卫生保健环境的重大负担。这些问题可能因当地文化和相关政策而异。目前关于这一主题的文献主要涉及盎格鲁-撒克逊文化;本研究的重点是了解拉丁美洲一个中等收入国家对信息披露的看法。方法:在2021年6月至8月进行的这项描述性研究中,一项关于信息披露实践的在线自我管理调查使用了995名巴西医疗保健专业人员的方便样本。结果:基于假设不良事件后出现的两种不同结果(结果1:死亡;结果2:无永久性损害),77.9%的参与者完全同意在两种情况下都应该进行披露。尽管67.1%的人认为信息披露会改变相关人员对机构的看法,但只有8.3%的人完全同意这会降低对机构的信任。尽管只有11.5%的参与者完全同意信息披露增加了对专业人员和机构采取法律行动的可能性,但92.7%的人完全或部分同意在情景1中可能进行司法审判,72.4%的人同意在情景2中可能进行司法审判。在参与者中,64.2%的人声称他们已经面临“披露”的情况,44.3%的人完全认为直接参与不良事件的人应该参与披露。结论:在这个来自拉丁美洲中等收入国家的专业人员样本中,披露的做法被认为是道德的,大多数受访者肯定应该一直这样做。尽管如此,这种对透明度的呼吁与参与者的看法相冲突,即在出现负面结果后进行披露时,法律行动的风险更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信