Challenges to concordance: theories that explain variations in patient responses

Failing to establish a collaborative relationship between patient and health professional can be a significant obstacle to recovery. Julie Green and Rebecca Jester delve into the psychology behind patient responses and present methods to empower patients.This article was first published in the British Journal of Community Nursing, volume 24, issue 10.Published versio

Using the failure mode and effects analysis model to improve parathyroid hormone and adrenocorticotropic hormone testing

Racheli Magnezi,1 Asaf Hemi,1 Rina Hemi2 1Department of Management, Public Health and Health Systems Management Program, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, 2Endocrine Service Unit, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel Background: Risk management in health care systems applies to all hospital employees and directors as they deal with human life and emergency routines. There is a constant need to decrease risk and increase patient safety in the hospital environment. The purpose of this article is to review the laboratory testing procedures for parathyroid hormone and adrenocorticotropic hormone (which are characterized by short half-lives) and to track failure modes and risks, and offer solutions to prevent them. During a routine quality improvement review at the Endocrine Laboratory in Tel Hashomer Hospital, we discovered these tests are frequently repeated unnecessarily due to multiple failures. The repetition of the tests inconveniences patients and leads to extra work for the laboratory and logistics personnel as well as the nurses and doctors who have to perform many tasks with limited resources.Methods: A team of eight staff members accompanied by the Head of the Endocrine Laboratory formed the team for analysis. The failure mode and effects analysis model (FMEA) was used to analyze the laboratory testing procedure and was designed to simplify the process steps and indicate and rank possible failures.Results: A total of 23 failure modes were found within the process, 19 of which were ranked by level of severity. The FMEA model prioritizes failures by their risk priority number (RPN). For example, the most serious failure was the delay after the samples were collected from the department (RPN =226.1).Conclusion: This model helped us to visualize the process in a simple way. After analyzing the information, solutions were proposed to prevent failures, and a method to completely avoid the top four problems was also developed. Keywords: failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA), laboratory medicine, team work, rank failures, test repetitio

Comparison between neurostimulation techniques rapid transcranial magnetic stimulation vs electroconvulsive therapy for the treatment of resistant depression: patient preference and cost-effectiveness

Racheli Magnezi,1 Emanuel Aminov,1 Dikla Shmuel,2 Merav Dreifuss,1 Pinhas Dannon1,2 1Public Health and Health Systems Management Program, Department of Management, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, 2Beer Yaakov Mental Health Center affiliated to Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel Objectives: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common disorder, widely distributed in the population, and is often associated with severe symptoms and functional impairment. It has been estimated that 30% of MDD patients do not benefit adequately from therapeutic interventions, including pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy. Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is generally defined as a failure to achieve remission, despite therapeutic interventions. Aim: The most effective treatment alternatives for TRD are hospitalization, electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Here we compared the clinical effectiveness of ECT and TMS, including success rates, patient responses, side-effect profiles, and financial worthiness. Results: We found that ECT (P<0.0001) was more effective than TMS (P<0.012) (not statistically significant in group effect) in TRD patients. However, ECT patients reported a higher percentage of side effects (P<0.01) and the TMS treatment scored better in terms of patient preference. The cost benefit of ECT was higher than that of TMS (US$2075 vs US$814). Patient’s preferences for treatment could be more intense in the TMS, if the TMS is included in the Health Maintenance Organization’s service list. Conclusion: We propose that both of these treatment options should be available in psychiatric wards, thus expanding the therapeutic toolkit for TRD. Keywords: ECT, TMS, treatment-resistant depression, cost benefit, patient preferenc