Patients\u27 satisfaction and opinions of their experiences during admission in a tertiary care hospital in Pakistan - a cross sectional study

Background: It is often felt that developing countries need to improve their quality of healthcare provision. This study hopes to generate data that can help managers and doctors to improve the standard of care they provide in line with the wishes of the patients.Methods: It was a cross sectional study carried out at a major tertiary care hospital of Karachi. Patients between the ages of 18 and 80 years admitted to the hospital for at least one day were included. Patients in the maternity, psychiatry and chemotherapy wards and those in the ICU/CCU were excluded. A pretested, peer reviewed translation of a validated patient satisfaction scale developed by the Picker Institute of Europe was administered.Results: A total of 173 patients (response rate: 78.6 %) filled the questionnaire. Patient satisfaction was at levels comparable to European surveys for most aspects of hospital care. However, nearly half the patients (48%) felt they had to wait too long to get a bed in the hospital after presenting to the ER. 68.6% of the patients said that they were never asked for views on the quality of care provided. 20% of the patients did not find anyone in the staff to talk to about their worries and fears while 27.6% felt that they were given emotional support to only some extent. Up to one third of the patients said they were not provided enough information regarding their operative procedures beforehand.CONCLUSION: Although several components of patient care equal the quality levels of the west, many sections require considerable improvement in order to improve health care provision. The healthcare team needs to get more involved with the patients, providing them greater support and keeping them informed and involved with their medical treatment. Efforts should be made to get regular feedback from the patients

Patients' satisfaction and opinions of their experiences during admission in a tertiary care hospital in Pakistan – a cross sectional study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>It is often felt that developing countries need to improve their quality of healthcare provision. This study hopes to generate data that can help managers and doctors to improve the standard of care they provide in line with the wishes of the patients.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>It was a cross sectional study carried out at a major tertiary care hospital of Karachi. Patients between the ages of 18 and 80 years admitted to the hospital for at least one day were included. Patients in the maternity, psychiatry and chemotherapy wards and those in the ICU/CCU were excluded. A pretested, peer reviewed translation of a validated patient satisfaction scale developed by the Picker Institute of Europe was administered.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 173 patients (response rate: 78.6 %) filled the questionnaire. Patient satisfaction was at levels comparable to European surveys for most aspects of hospital care. However, nearly half the patients (48%) felt they had to wait too long to get a bed in the hospital after presenting to the ER. 68.6% of the patients said that they were never asked for views on the quality of care provided. 20% of the patients did not find anyone in the staff to talk to about their worries and fears while 27.6% felt that they were given emotional support to only some extent. Up to one third of the patients said they were not provided enough information regarding their operative procedures beforehand.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Although several components of patient care equal the quality levels of the west, many sections require considerable improvement in order to improve health care provision. The healthcare team needs to get more involved with the patients, providing them greater support and keeping them informed and involved with their medical treatment. Efforts should be made to get regular feedback from the patients.</p

Impact of opioid-free analgesia on pain severity and patient satisfaction after discharge from surgery: multispecialty, prospective cohort study in 25 countries

Background: Balancing opioid stewardship and the need for adequate analgesia following discharge after surgery is challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes for patients discharged with opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after common surgical procedures.Methods: This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study collected data from patients undergoing common acute and elective general surgical, urological, gynaecological, and orthopaedic procedures. The primary outcomes were patient-reported time in severe pain measured on a numerical analogue scale from 0 to 100% and patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief during the first week following discharge. Data were collected by in-hospital chart review and patient telephone interview 1 week after discharge.Results: The study recruited 4273 patients from 144 centres in 25 countries; 1311 patients (30.7%) were prescribed opioid analgesia at discharge. Patients reported being in severe pain for 10 (i.q.r. 1-30)% of the first week after discharge and rated satisfaction with analgesia as 90 (i.q.r. 80-100) of 100. After adjustment for confounders, opioid analgesia on discharge was independently associated with increased pain severity (risk ratio 1.52, 95% c.i. 1.31 to 1.76; P &lt; 0.001) and re-presentation to healthcare providers owing to side-effects of medication (OR 2.38, 95% c.i. 1.36 to 4.17; P = 0.004), but not with satisfaction with analgesia (beta coefficient 0.92, 95% c.i. -1.52 to 3.36; P = 0.468) compared with opioid-free analgesia. Although opioid prescribing varied greatly between high-income and low- and middle-income countries, patient-reported outcomes did not.Conclusion: Opioid analgesia prescription on surgical discharge is associated with a higher risk of re-presentation owing to side-effects of medication and increased patient-reported pain, but not with changes in patient-reported satisfaction. Opioid-free discharge analgesia should be adopted routinely

Urine My Heart: A Case of Aerococcal Endocarditis.

An elderly woman with previously known valvular disease presented to the emergency department due to altered mental status. In addition to obtaining an infectious work-up, a bedside echocardiogram was performed and revealed right heart strain prompting a formal echocardiogram evaluation and treatment for a possible pulmonary embolism. Initial laboratory work returned with blood and urine cultures positive for Aerococcus urinae. A transthoracic echocardiogram further revealed new aortic regurgitation. Given this, a transesophageal echocardiogram was completed, confirming new aortic insufficiency as well as findings of infective endocarditis. She did not undergo surgical intervention; however, she was discharged with a plan to continue intravenous antibiotics for six weeks. Although typically seen in genitourinary infections, A. urinae is a rare cause of infective endocarditis and is increasingly identified due to improved speciation techniques. We describe a unique presentation of invasive A. urinae infection to increase awareness and further research on a less commonly encountered bacteria that may present as a urinary tract infection and has the potential to cause invasive disease

The biological and clinical characteristics of breast carcinoma with mixed ductal and lobular morphology

International audienceAlthough invasive ductal (IDC) and lobular (ILC) breast carcinomas are well characterised in the literature, the biological and clinical significance of mixed tumours with both ductal and lobular components has not been investigated. In the current study, we have examined a well-characterised series of breast carcinoma with a long term follow-up that comprised 140 mixed tumours, 2170 IDC and 380 pure ILC. Results: Mixed tumours constituted 3.6% of all cases. The majority (59%) of the mixed tumours were grade 2 compared to 33% in IDC and 88% in ILC. Positive lymph nodes (LN) were found in 41% and definite vascular invasion (VI) in 26% of the cases. DCIS was detected in 123 (89%) and LCIS in 43 (31%) (both DCIS and LCIS were found in 39 cases). The majority of tumours were predominantly (>50 of tumour area) of ductal type (57%). When compared to pure IDC, mixed tumours showed an association with lower grade, ER positivity and lower frequency of development of distant metastases. When compared to pure ILC, mixed tumours showed an association with higher grade, positive LN metastasis, VI and development of regional metastasis. After adjustment for grade most of these differences were no longer apparent. There was an association between histologic type of carcinoma in LN metastasis and the predominant histologic type of the primary tumour. Mixed tumours showed metastatic patterns similar to that of ILC with frequent metastasis to bone. No clinically meaningful differences in survival were found between these mixed carcinomas and pure IDC or ILC of the breast or between mixed tumours with predominantly ductal or lobular phenotype