评估SinergiAPS,一种基于患者反馈的干预措施,以提高初级保健患者的安全性:一项集群随机试验。

IF 7 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Maria Antònia Fiol-deRoque, José María Valderas, María Jesús Serrano-Ripoll, Montserrat Gens-Barbarà, Francisco Martín-Luján, Encarna Sánchez-Freire, Juan José Montaño, Sofía Mira-Martínez, Guadalupe Pastor-Moreno, Rocío Zamanillo-Campos, Pau Riera-Serra, Ignacio Ricci-Cabello
{"title":"评估SinergiAPS,一种基于患者反馈的干预措施,以提高初级保健患者的安全性:一项集群随机试验。","authors":"Maria Antònia Fiol-deRoque, José María Valderas, María Jesús Serrano-Ripoll, Montserrat Gens-Barbarà, Francisco Martín-Luján, Encarna Sánchez-Freire, Juan José Montaño, Sofía Mira-Martínez, Guadalupe Pastor-Moreno, Rocío Zamanillo-Campos, Pau Riera-Serra, Ignacio Ricci-Cabello","doi":"10.1186/s12916-025-04029-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient safety, defined by the WHO as the absence of preventable harm, is a critical component of healthcare quality and poses a significant challenge globally. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of SinergiAPS, a patient-centred audit and feedback intervention, in improving patient safety in primary healthcare (PHC) centres.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a 12-month cluster randomized controlled, multicentre trial. Fifty-nine PHC centres (1053 PHC professionals) in Spain were recruited and randomly allocated (1:1) to usual care or SinergiAPS intervention. The SinergiAPS intervention comprised: a bespoke feedback report with results from audits of patient safety based on the Patient Reported Experiences and Outcomes of Safety in Primary Care (PREOS-PC) questionnaire, administered to 75 patients/centre; a set of educational materials, and a structured template to record safety improvement plans. The primary outcome (at the PHC professional level) was patient safety culture (Medical Office Survey on Patient Safety Culture (MOSPSC) questionnaire). Secondary outcomes (at the centre level) were patient-reported safety (six PREOS-PC scales), and rate of avoidable hospital admissions. After a 12-month follow-up, we conducted 15 semi-structured interviews with PHC professionals to explore their perceptions of the intervention.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the 12-month follow-up, 10 of the 30 centres in the intervention group held action plan team meetings and eight registered 57 safety improvement action plans. The plans aimed to improve patient activation, address treatment-related incidents, enhance communication between patients and providers, and strengthen patient safety culture. At 12 months, no significant differences were observed in MOSPSC mean score (intervention: 3.60 [95% CI 3.55 to 3.64] vs. control: 3.64 [3.60 to 3.68]). Similarly, no differences were observed in the secondary outcomes, with both groups experiencing a decline in patient-reported safety and avoidable hospital admissions. The qualitative interviews evidenced that the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic 6-9 weeks after initiating the follow-up period severely limited PHC's capacity of developing and implementing safety improvement action plans, despite high levels of acceptability and perceived utility of the SinergiAPS intervention.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In the context of the health emergency caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, SinergiAPS did not improve patient safety in Spanish PHC centres.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03837912).</p>","PeriodicalId":9188,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medicine","volume":"23 1","pages":"202"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11974217/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating SinergiAPS, an intervention based on patient feedback to improve patient safety in primary care: a cluster randomized trial.\",\"authors\":\"Maria Antònia Fiol-deRoque, José María Valderas, María Jesús Serrano-Ripoll, Montserrat Gens-Barbarà, Francisco Martín-Luján, Encarna Sánchez-Freire, Juan José Montaño, Sofía Mira-Martínez, Guadalupe Pastor-Moreno, Rocío Zamanillo-Campos, Pau Riera-Serra, Ignacio Ricci-Cabello\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12916-025-04029-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient safety, defined by the WHO as the absence of preventable harm, is a critical component of healthcare quality and poses a significant challenge globally. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of SinergiAPS, a patient-centred audit and feedback intervention, in improving patient safety in primary healthcare (PHC) centres.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a 12-month cluster randomized controlled, multicentre trial. Fifty-nine PHC centres (1053 PHC professionals) in Spain were recruited and randomly allocated (1:1) to usual care or SinergiAPS intervention. The SinergiAPS intervention comprised: a bespoke feedback report with results from audits of patient safety based on the Patient Reported Experiences and Outcomes of Safety in Primary Care (PREOS-PC) questionnaire, administered to 75 patients/centre; a set of educational materials, and a structured template to record safety improvement plans. The primary outcome (at the PHC professional level) was patient safety culture (Medical Office Survey on Patient Safety Culture (MOSPSC) questionnaire). Secondary outcomes (at the centre level) were patient-reported safety (six PREOS-PC scales), and rate of avoidable hospital admissions. After a 12-month follow-up, we conducted 15 semi-structured interviews with PHC professionals to explore their perceptions of the intervention.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the 12-month follow-up, 10 of the 30 centres in the intervention group held action plan team meetings and eight registered 57 safety improvement action plans. The plans aimed to improve patient activation, address treatment-related incidents, enhance communication between patients and providers, and strengthen patient safety culture. At 12 months, no significant differences were observed in MOSPSC mean score (intervention: 3.60 [95% CI 3.55 to 3.64] vs. control: 3.64 [3.60 to 3.68]). Similarly, no differences were observed in the secondary outcomes, with both groups experiencing a decline in patient-reported safety and avoidable hospital admissions. The qualitative interviews evidenced that the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic 6-9 weeks after initiating the follow-up period severely limited PHC's capacity of developing and implementing safety improvement action plans, despite high levels of acceptability and perceived utility of the SinergiAPS intervention.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In the context of the health emergency caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, SinergiAPS did not improve patient safety in Spanish PHC centres.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03837912).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9188,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Medicine\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"202\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11974217/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-025-04029-7\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-025-04029-7","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:世界卫生组织将患者安全定义为没有可预防的伤害,患者安全是医疗质量的重要组成部分,也是全球面临的一项重大挑战。本研究旨在评估 SinergiAPS(一种以患者为中心的审核和反馈干预措施)在改善初级卫生保健(PHC)中心患者安全方面的效果:我们开展了一项为期 12 个月的分组随机对照多中心试验。我们在西班牙招募了 59 家初级卫生保健中心(1053 名初级卫生保健专业人员),并随机分配(1:1)到常规护理或 SinergiAPS 干预方案中。SinergiAPS 干预措施包括:一份定制反馈报告,其中包含根据患者报告经历和初级保健安全结果(PREOS-PC)问卷调查得出的患者安全审计结果,对 75 名患者/中心进行管理;一套教育材料和一个结构化模板,用于记录安全改进计划。主要结果(初级保健专业层面)是患者安全文化(医务室患者安全文化调查(MOSPSC)问卷)。次要结果(在中心层面)是患者报告的安全性(PREOS-PC 六项量表)和可避免的住院率。在为期 12 个月的随访后,我们对初级保健中心的专业人员进行了 15 次半结构化访谈,以了解他们对干预措施的看法:在 12 个月的随访期间,干预组的 30 个中心中有 10 个召开了行动计划小组会议,8 个登记了 57 项安全改进行动计划。这些计划旨在提高患者的积极性、解决与治疗相关的事故、加强患者与医疗服务提供者之间的沟通以及加强患者安全文化。12 个月后,MOSPSC 平均得分未见明显差异(干预组:3.60 [95% CI 3.55 至 3.64] 对对照组:3.64 [3.60 至 3.68])。同样,在次要结果中也未观察到差异,两组患者报告的安全性和可避免的入院率均有所下降。定性访谈结果表明,尽管SinergiAPS干预措施的可接受性和可感知的效用很高,但COVID-19大流行在随访期开始6-9周后爆发,严重限制了初级保健中心制定和实施安全改进行动计划的能力:结论:在 COVID-19 大流行引发的卫生紧急状况下,SinergiAPS 并未改善西班牙初级保健中心的患者安全:试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03837912)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating SinergiAPS, an intervention based on patient feedback to improve patient safety in primary care: a cluster randomized trial.

Background: Patient safety, defined by the WHO as the absence of preventable harm, is a critical component of healthcare quality and poses a significant challenge globally. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of SinergiAPS, a patient-centred audit and feedback intervention, in improving patient safety in primary healthcare (PHC) centres.

Methods: We conducted a 12-month cluster randomized controlled, multicentre trial. Fifty-nine PHC centres (1053 PHC professionals) in Spain were recruited and randomly allocated (1:1) to usual care or SinergiAPS intervention. The SinergiAPS intervention comprised: a bespoke feedback report with results from audits of patient safety based on the Patient Reported Experiences and Outcomes of Safety in Primary Care (PREOS-PC) questionnaire, administered to 75 patients/centre; a set of educational materials, and a structured template to record safety improvement plans. The primary outcome (at the PHC professional level) was patient safety culture (Medical Office Survey on Patient Safety Culture (MOSPSC) questionnaire). Secondary outcomes (at the centre level) were patient-reported safety (six PREOS-PC scales), and rate of avoidable hospital admissions. After a 12-month follow-up, we conducted 15 semi-structured interviews with PHC professionals to explore their perceptions of the intervention.

Results: During the 12-month follow-up, 10 of the 30 centres in the intervention group held action plan team meetings and eight registered 57 safety improvement action plans. The plans aimed to improve patient activation, address treatment-related incidents, enhance communication between patients and providers, and strengthen patient safety culture. At 12 months, no significant differences were observed in MOSPSC mean score (intervention: 3.60 [95% CI 3.55 to 3.64] vs. control: 3.64 [3.60 to 3.68]). Similarly, no differences were observed in the secondary outcomes, with both groups experiencing a decline in patient-reported safety and avoidable hospital admissions. The qualitative interviews evidenced that the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic 6-9 weeks after initiating the follow-up period severely limited PHC's capacity of developing and implementing safety improvement action plans, despite high levels of acceptability and perceived utility of the SinergiAPS intervention.

Conclusions: In the context of the health emergency caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, SinergiAPS did not improve patient safety in Spanish PHC centres.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03837912).

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
BMC Medicine
BMC Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
13.10
自引率
1.10%
发文量
435
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medicine is an open access, transparent peer-reviewed general medical journal. It is the flagship journal of the BMC series and publishes outstanding and influential research in various areas including clinical practice, translational medicine, medical and health advances, public health, global health, policy, and general topics of interest to the biomedical and sociomedical professional communities. In addition to research articles, the journal also publishes stimulating debates, reviews, unique forum articles, and concise tutorials. All articles published in BMC Medicine are included in various databases such as Biological Abstracts, BIOSIS, CAS, Citebase, Current contents, DOAJ, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Science Citation Index Expanded, OAIster, SCImago, Scopus, SOCOLAR, and Zetoc.
×
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