COVID-19 期间全科医生的患者安全:38 个国家的描述性分析(PRICOV-19)。

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Esther Van Poel, Pierre Vanden Bussche, Claire Collins, Susan Lagaert, Sara Ares-Blanco, Maria Pilar Astier-Pena, Jonila Gabrani, Raquel Gomez Bravo, Kathryn Hoffmann, Zalika Klemenc-Ketis, Christian Mallen, Ana Luisa Neves, Zlata Ožvačić, Victoria Tkachenko, Dorien Zwart, Sara Willems
{"title":"COVID-19 期间全科医生的患者安全:38 个国家的描述性分析(PRICOV-19)。","authors":"Esther Van Poel, Pierre Vanden Bussche, Claire Collins, Susan Lagaert, Sara Ares-Blanco, Maria Pilar Astier-Pena, Jonila Gabrani, Raquel Gomez Bravo, Kathryn Hoffmann, Zalika Klemenc-Ketis, Christian Mallen, Ana Luisa Neves, Zlata Ožvačić, Victoria Tkachenko, Dorien Zwart, Sara Willems","doi":"10.1093/fampra/cmae059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This article aims to examine patient safety in general practice during COVID-19.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In total, 5489 GP practices from 37 European countries and Israel filled in the online self-reported PRICOV-19 survey between November 2020 and December 2021. The outcome measures include 30 patient safety indicators on structure, process, and outcome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The data showed that structural problems often impeded patient safety during COVID-19, as 58.6% of practices (3209/5479) reported limitations related to their building or infrastructure. Nevertheless, GP practices rapidly changed their processes, including the appointment systems. Implementation proved challenging as, although 76.1% of practices (3751/4932) developed a protocol to answer calls from potential COVID patients, only 34.4% (1252/3643) always used it. The proportion of practices reported having sufficient protected time in general practitioners' schedules to review guidelines remained consistent when comparing the pre-COVID (34.2%,1647/4813) with the COVID period (33.2%,1600/4813). Overall, 42.8% of practices (1966/4590) always informed home care services when patients were diagnosed with COVID-19, while this decreased to 30.1% for other major infectious diseases (1341/4458). Most practices reported at least one incident of delayed care in patients with an urgent condition, most often because the patient did not come to the practice sooner (60.4%, 2561/4237). Moreover, 31.1% of practices (1349/4199) always organized a team discussion when incidents happened. Overall, large variations were found across countries and patient safety indicators.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results demonstrated that European GP practices adopted numerous measures to deliver safe care during COVID-19. However, multilayered interventions are needed to improve infection control and GP practice accessibility in future pandemics.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient safety in general practice during COVID-19: a descriptive analysis in 38 countries (PRICOV-19).\",\"authors\":\"Esther Van Poel, Pierre Vanden Bussche, Claire Collins, Susan Lagaert, Sara Ares-Blanco, Maria Pilar Astier-Pena, Jonila Gabrani, Raquel Gomez Bravo, Kathryn Hoffmann, Zalika Klemenc-Ketis, Christian Mallen, Ana Luisa Neves, Zlata Ožvačić, Victoria Tkachenko, Dorien Zwart, Sara Willems\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/fampra/cmae059\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This article aims to examine patient safety in general practice during COVID-19.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In total, 5489 GP practices from 37 European countries and Israel filled in the online self-reported PRICOV-19 survey between November 2020 and December 2021. The outcome measures include 30 patient safety indicators on structure, process, and outcome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The data showed that structural problems often impeded patient safety during COVID-19, as 58.6% of practices (3209/5479) reported limitations related to their building or infrastructure. Nevertheless, GP practices rapidly changed their processes, including the appointment systems. Implementation proved challenging as, although 76.1% of practices (3751/4932) developed a protocol to answer calls from potential COVID patients, only 34.4% (1252/3643) always used it. The proportion of practices reported having sufficient protected time in general practitioners' schedules to review guidelines remained consistent when comparing the pre-COVID (34.2%,1647/4813) with the COVID period (33.2%,1600/4813). Overall, 42.8% of practices (1966/4590) always informed home care services when patients were diagnosed with COVID-19, while this decreased to 30.1% for other major infectious diseases (1341/4458). Most practices reported at least one incident of delayed care in patients with an urgent condition, most often because the patient did not come to the practice sooner (60.4%, 2561/4237). Moreover, 31.1% of practices (1349/4199) always organized a team discussion when incidents happened. Overall, large variations were found across countries and patient safety indicators.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results demonstrated that European GP practices adopted numerous measures to deliver safe care during COVID-19. However, multilayered interventions are needed to improve infection control and GP practice accessibility in future pandemics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmae059\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmae059","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本文旨在研究 COVID-19 期间全科医生的患者安全问题:本文旨在研究 COVID-19 期间全科医生的患者安全问题:来自 37 个欧洲国家和以色列的 5489 家全科医生诊所在 2020 年 11 月至 2021 年 12 月期间填写了在线自我报告 PRICOV-19 调查表。结果测量包括结构、过程和结果方面的 30 项患者安全指标:数据显示,在 COVID-19 期间,58.6% 的诊所(3209/5479)报告了与建筑或基础设施相关的限制因素,因此结构性问题往往会阻碍患者安全。然而,全科医生诊所迅速改变了其流程,包括预约系统。尽管 76.1% 的诊所(3751/4932)制定了接听潜在 COVID 患者电话的协议,但只有 34.4%(1252/3643)的诊所一直在使用该协议。与 COVID 前(34.2%,1647/4813)和 COVID 期间(33.2%,1600/4813)相比,报告在全科医生的日程安排中有足够的保护时间来审查指南的诊所比例保持一致。总体而言,42.8%的医疗机构(1966/4590)在患者确诊为 COVID-19 时总是会通知居家护理服务机构,而在其他主要传染病方面,这一比例降至 30.1%(1341/4458)。大多数医疗机构报告至少发生过一次急诊病人延误治疗的情况,最常见的原因是病人没有及早到医疗机构就诊(60.4%,2561/4237)。此外,31.1%的医疗机构(1349/4199)总是在发生事故时组织团队讨论。总体而言,不同国家和不同患者安全指标之间存在很大差异:研究结果表明,欧洲全科医生诊所在 COVID-19 期间采取了许多措施来提供安全护理。然而,在未来的大流行病中,需要采取多层次的干预措施来改善感染控制和全科医生诊所的可及性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Patient safety in general practice during COVID-19: a descriptive analysis in 38 countries (PRICOV-19).

Background: This article aims to examine patient safety in general practice during COVID-19.

Methods: In total, 5489 GP practices from 37 European countries and Israel filled in the online self-reported PRICOV-19 survey between November 2020 and December 2021. The outcome measures include 30 patient safety indicators on structure, process, and outcome.

Results: The data showed that structural problems often impeded patient safety during COVID-19, as 58.6% of practices (3209/5479) reported limitations related to their building or infrastructure. Nevertheless, GP practices rapidly changed their processes, including the appointment systems. Implementation proved challenging as, although 76.1% of practices (3751/4932) developed a protocol to answer calls from potential COVID patients, only 34.4% (1252/3643) always used it. The proportion of practices reported having sufficient protected time in general practitioners' schedules to review guidelines remained consistent when comparing the pre-COVID (34.2%,1647/4813) with the COVID period (33.2%,1600/4813). Overall, 42.8% of practices (1966/4590) always informed home care services when patients were diagnosed with COVID-19, while this decreased to 30.1% for other major infectious diseases (1341/4458). Most practices reported at least one incident of delayed care in patients with an urgent condition, most often because the patient did not come to the practice sooner (60.4%, 2561/4237). Moreover, 31.1% of practices (1349/4199) always organized a team discussion when incidents happened. Overall, large variations were found across countries and patient safety indicators.

Conclusions: The results demonstrated that European GP practices adopted numerous measures to deliver safe care during COVID-19. However, multilayered interventions are needed to improve infection control and GP practice accessibility in future pandemics.

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
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
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