Emergency hospital services utilization in Lleida (Spain): A cross-sectional study of immigrant and Spanish-born populations

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The use of emergency hospital services (EHS) has increased steadily in Spain in the last decade while the number of immigrants has increased dramatically. Studies show that immigrants use EHS differently than native-born individuals, and this work investigates demographics, diagnoses and utilization rates of EHS in Lleida (Spain).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Cross-sectional study of all the 96,916 EHS visits by patients 15 to 64 years old, attended during the years 2004 and 2005 in a public teaching hospital. Demographic data, diagnoses of the EHS visits, frequency of hospital admissions, mortality and diagnoses at hospital discharge were obtained. Utilization rates were estimated by group of origin. Poisson regression was used to estimate the rate ratios of being visited in the EHS with respect to the Spanish-born population.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Immigrants from low-income countries use EHS services more than the Spanish-born population. Differences in utilization patterns are particularly marked for Maghrebi men and women and sub-Saharan women. Immigrant males are at lower risk of being admitted to the hospital, as compared with Spanish-born males. On the other hand, immigrant women are at higher risk of being admitted. After excluding the visits with gynecologic and obstetric diagnoses, women from sub-Saharan Africa and the Maghreb are still at a higher risk of being admitted than their Spanish-born counterparts.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In Lleida (Spain), immigrants use more EHS than the Spanish born population. Future research should indicate whether the same pattern is found in other areas of Spain and whether EHS use is attributable to health needs, barriers to access to the primary care services or similarities in the way immigrants access health care in their countries of origin.</p

Effects of auditing patient safety in hospital care: design of a mixed-method evaluation

Contains fulltext : 125391.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Auditing of patient safety aims at early detection of risks of adverse events and is intended to encourage the continuous improvement of patient safety. The auditing should be an independent, objective assurance and consulting system. Auditing helps an organisation accomplish its objectives by bringing a systematic, disciplined approach to evaluating and improving the effectiveness of risk management, control, and governance. Audits are broadly conducted in hospitals, but little is known about their effects on the behaviour of healthcare professionals and patient safety outcomes. This study was initiated to evaluate the effects of patient safety auditing in hospital care and to explore the processes and mechanisms underlying these effects.Methods and design: Our study aims to evaluate an audit system to monitor and improve patient safety in a hospital setting. We are using a mixed-method evaluation with a before-and-after study design in eight departments of one university hospital in the period October 2011--July 2014. We measure several outcomes 3 months before the audit and 15 months after the audit. The primary outcomes are adverse events and complications. The secondary outcomes are experiences of patients, the standardised mortality ratio, prolonged hospital stay, patient safety culture, and team climate. We use medical record reviews, questionnaires, hospital administrative data, and observations to assess the outcomes. A process evaluation will be used to find out which components of internal auditing determine the effects. DISCUSSION: We report a study protocol of an effect and process evaluation to determine whether auditing improves patient safety in hospital care. Because auditing is a complex intervention targeted on several levels, we are using a combination of methods to collect qualitative and quantitative data about patient safety at the patient, professional, and department levels. This study is relevant for hospitals that want to early detect unsafe care and improve patient safety continuously.Trial registration: Netherlands Trial Register (NTR): NTR3343