用于识别和评估中级和长期护理中心不良事件频率的工具和警告信号:叙述式系统综述》。

IF 1.1 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
{"title":"用于识别和评估中级和长期护理中心不良事件频率的工具和警告信号:叙述式系统综述》。","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jhqr.2024.06.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>There is a lack of data about adverse events (AE) in intermediate and long-term care centers (ILCC). We aimed to synthesize the available scientific evidence on instruments used to identify and characterize AEs. We also aimed to describe the most common adverse events in ILCCs.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>A narrative systematic review of the literature was conducted according to Prisma recommendations. The PubMed database was searched for articles published between 2000 and 2021. Two reviewers independently screened and reviewed the studies through blind and independent review. We evaluated bias risk with Cochrane's risk of bias tool. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Discrepancies that were not resolved by discussion were discussed with a third reviewer. Descriptive data was extracted and qualitative content analysis was performed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We found 2191 articles. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 272 papers were screened by title and abstract, and 66 studies were selected for full review. The instruments used to identify AEs were mostly tools to identify specific AEs or risks of AEs (94%), the remaining 6% were multidimensional. The most frequent categories detected medication-related AEs (<em>n</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->26, 40%); falls (<em>n</em> <!-->=<!--> <span>7, 11%); psychiatric AEs (6.9%); malnutrition (4.6%), and infections (4.6%). The studies that used multidimensional tools refer to frailty, dependency, or lack of energy as predictors of AEs. However, they do not take into account the importance of detecting AEs. We found 2–11 adverse drug events (ADE) per resident/month. We found a prevalence of falls (12.5%), delirium (9.6–89%), pain (68%), malnutrition (2–83%), and pressure ulcers (3–30%). Urinary tract infections, lower respiratory tract infections, skin and soft tissue infections, and gastroenteritis were the most common infections in this setting. Transitions between different care settings (from hospitals to ILCC and vice versa) expose AE risk.</span></p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There are many instruments to detect AEs in ILCC, and most have a specific approach. Adverse events affect a significant proportion of patients in ILCC, the nurse-sensitive outcomes, nosocomial infections, and adverse drug events are among the most common.</p><p>The systematic review was registered with Prospero, ID: CRD42022348168.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37347,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Healthcare Quality Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Instruments and Warning Signs for Identifying and Evaluating the Frequency of Adverse Events in Intermediate and Long-Term Care Centres: A Narrative Systematic Review\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jhqr.2024.06.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>There is a lack of data about adverse events (AE) in intermediate and long-term care centers (ILCC). We aimed to synthesize the available scientific evidence on instruments used to identify and characterize AEs. We also aimed to describe the most common adverse events in ILCCs.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>A narrative systematic review of the literature was conducted according to Prisma recommendations. The PubMed database was searched for articles published between 2000 and 2021. Two reviewers independently screened and reviewed the studies through blind and independent review. We evaluated bias risk with Cochrane's risk of bias tool. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Discrepancies that were not resolved by discussion were discussed with a third reviewer. Descriptive data was extracted and qualitative content analysis was performed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We found 2191 articles. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 272 papers were screened by title and abstract, and 66 studies were selected for full review. The instruments used to identify AEs were mostly tools to identify specific AEs or risks of AEs (94%), the remaining 6% were multidimensional. The most frequent categories detected medication-related AEs (<em>n</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->26, 40%); falls (<em>n</em> <!-->=<!--> <span>7, 11%); psychiatric AEs (6.9%); malnutrition (4.6%), and infections (4.6%). The studies that used multidimensional tools refer to frailty, dependency, or lack of energy as predictors of AEs. However, they do not take into account the importance of detecting AEs. We found 2–11 adverse drug events (ADE) per resident/month. We found a prevalence of falls (12.5%), delirium (9.6–89%), pain (68%), malnutrition (2–83%), and pressure ulcers (3–30%). Urinary tract infections, lower respiratory tract infections, skin and soft tissue infections, and gastroenteritis were the most common infections in this setting. Transitions between different care settings (from hospitals to ILCC and vice versa) expose AE risk.</span></p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There are many instruments to detect AEs in ILCC, and most have a specific approach. Adverse events affect a significant proportion of patients in ILCC, the nurse-sensitive outcomes, nosocomial infections, and adverse drug events are among the most common.</p><p>The systematic review was registered with Prospero, ID: CRD42022348168.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37347,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Healthcare Quality Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Healthcare Quality Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S260364792400054X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Healthcare Quality Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S260364792400054X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:关于中长期护理中心(ILCC)不良事件(AE)的数据十分匮乏。我们旨在综合现有的科学证据,了解用于识别和描述不良事件的工具。我们还旨在描述中长期护理中心最常见的不良事件:根据 Prisma 建议对文献进行了叙述性系统综述。我们在PubMed数据库中搜索了2000年至2021年间发表的文章。两名审稿人通过盲审和独立审稿对研究进行了独立筛选和审查。我们使用 Cochrane 的偏倚风险工具评估了偏倚风险。出现分歧时,我们以协商一致的方式解决。无法通过讨论解决的分歧将与第三位审稿人讨论。提取描述性数据并进行定性内容分析:我们找到了 2191 篇文章。根据纳入和排除标准,通过标题和摘要筛选出 272 篇论文,并选择了 66 项研究进行全面审查。用于识别AEs的工具大多是识别特定AEs或AEs风险的工具(94%),其余6%为多维工具。最常见的类别包括药物相关的 AE(26 项,40%);跌倒(7 项,11%);精神科 AE(6.9%);营养不良(4.6%)和感染(4.6%)。使用多维工具的研究将虚弱、依赖性或乏力作为 AEs 的预测因素。然而,这些研究并未考虑到检测药物不良事件的重要性。我们发现每位住院患者每月会发生 2-11 次药物不良事件 (ADE)。我们发现跌倒(12.5%)、谵妄(9.6-89%)、疼痛(68%)、营养不良(2-83%)和压疮(3-30%)的发生率很高。尿路感染、下呼吸道感染、皮肤和软组织感染以及肠胃炎是这种环境中最常见的感染。不同护理环境之间的转换(从医院到 ILCC,反之亦然)暴露了 AE 风险:有许多工具可以检测 ILCC 中的不良事件,其中大多数都有特定的方法。不良事件对 ILCC 中相当一部分患者造成影响,其中最常见的是护士敏感结果、院内感染和药物不良事件。该系统综述已在 Prospero 注册,ID:CRD42022348168。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Instruments and Warning Signs for Identifying and Evaluating the Frequency of Adverse Events in Intermediate and Long-Term Care Centres: A Narrative Systematic Review

Introduction

There is a lack of data about adverse events (AE) in intermediate and long-term care centers (ILCC). We aimed to synthesize the available scientific evidence on instruments used to identify and characterize AEs. We also aimed to describe the most common adverse events in ILCCs.

Material and methods

A narrative systematic review of the literature was conducted according to Prisma recommendations. The PubMed database was searched for articles published between 2000 and 2021. Two reviewers independently screened and reviewed the studies through blind and independent review. We evaluated bias risk with Cochrane's risk of bias tool. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Discrepancies that were not resolved by discussion were discussed with a third reviewer. Descriptive data was extracted and qualitative content analysis was performed.

Results

We found 2191 articles. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 272 papers were screened by title and abstract, and 66 studies were selected for full review. The instruments used to identify AEs were mostly tools to identify specific AEs or risks of AEs (94%), the remaining 6% were multidimensional. The most frequent categories detected medication-related AEs (n = 26, 40%); falls (n = 7, 11%); psychiatric AEs (6.9%); malnutrition (4.6%), and infections (4.6%). The studies that used multidimensional tools refer to frailty, dependency, or lack of energy as predictors of AEs. However, they do not take into account the importance of detecting AEs. We found 2–11 adverse drug events (ADE) per resident/month. We found a prevalence of falls (12.5%), delirium (9.6–89%), pain (68%), malnutrition (2–83%), and pressure ulcers (3–30%). Urinary tract infections, lower respiratory tract infections, skin and soft tissue infections, and gastroenteritis were the most common infections in this setting. Transitions between different care settings (from hospitals to ILCC and vice versa) expose AE risk.

Conclusion

There are many instruments to detect AEs in ILCC, and most have a specific approach. Adverse events affect a significant proportion of patients in ILCC, the nurse-sensitive outcomes, nosocomial infections, and adverse drug events are among the most common.

The systematic review was registered with Prospero, ID: CRD42022348168.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
83
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: Revista de Calidad Asistencial (Quality Healthcare) (RCA) is the official Journal of the Spanish Society of Quality Healthcare (Sociedad Española de Calidad Asistencial) (SECA) and is a tool for the dissemination of knowledge and reflection for the quality management of health services in Primary Care, as well as in Hospitals. It publishes articles associated with any aspect of research in the field of public health and health administration, including health education, epidemiology, medical statistics, health information, health economics, quality management, and health policies. The Journal publishes 6 issues, exclusively in electronic format. The Journal publishes, in Spanish, Original works, Special and Review Articles, as well as other sections. Articles are subjected to a rigorous, double blind, review process (peer review)
×
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