a protocol for a scoping review

Funding Information: This work was supported by Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, I.P. through Comprehensive Health Research Centre (CHRC), National School of Public Health from NOVA University of Lisbon and under the grant UI/BD/150875/2021. Publisher Copyright: © 2022 BMJ Publishing Group. All rights reserved.Introduction Health organisations should support healthcare workers who are physically and psychologically affected by patient safety incidents (second victims). There is a growing body of evidence which focuses on second victim support interventions. However, there is still limited research on the elements necessary to effectively implement and ensure the sustainability of these types of interventions. In this study, we propose to map and frame the key factors which underlie an effective implementation of healthcare worker support interventions in healthcare organisations when healthcare workers are physically and/or emotionally affected by patient safety incidents. Methods and analysis This scoping review will be guided by the established methodological Arksey and O'Malley framework, Levac and Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) recommendations. We will follow the JBI three-step process: (1) a preliminary search conducted on two databases; (2) the definition of clear inclusion criteria and the creation of a list of search terms to be used in the subsequent running of the search on a larger number of databases; and (3) additional searches (cross-checking/cross-referencing of reference lists of eligible studies, hand-searching in target journals relevant to the topic, conference proceedings, institutional/organisational websites and networks repositories). We will undertake a comprehensive search strategy in relevant bibliographic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINHAL, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycInfo, Epistemonikos, Scielo, Cochrane Library and Open Grey). We will use the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool V.2018 for quality assessment of the eligible studies. Our scoping review will be guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews. Ethics and dissemination This study will not require ethical approval. Results of the scoping review will be published in a peer-review journal, and findings will be presented in scientific conferences as well as in international forums and other relevant dissemination channels. Trial registration number 10.17605/OSF.IO/RQAT6. Preprint from medRxiv available: doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.01.25.22269846.publishersversionpublishe

Contributing factors for acute stress in healthcare workers caring for COVID-19 patients in Argentina, Chile, Colombia, and Ecuador

This study analyzed the frequency and intensity of acute stress among health professionals caring for COVID-19 patients in four Latin American Spanish-speaking countries during the outbreak. A cross-sectional study involved a non-probability sample of healthcare professionals in four Latin American countries. Participants from each country were invited using a platform and mobile application designed for this study. Hospital and primary care workers from different services caring for COVID-19 patients were included. The EASE Scale (SARS-CoV-2 Emotional Overload Scale, in Spanish named Escala Auto-aplicada de Sobrecarga Emocional) was a previously validated measure of acute stress. EASE scores were described overall by age, sex, work area, and experience of being ill with COVID-19. Using the Mann–Whitney U test, the EASE scores were compared according to the most critical moments of the pandemic. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed to investigate associations between these factors and the outcome ‘acute stress’. Finally, the Kruskal–Wallis was used to compare EASE scores and the experience of being ill. A total of 1372 professionals responded to all the items in the EASE scale: 375 (27.3%) Argentines, 365 (26.6%) Colombians, 345 (25.1%) Chileans, 209 (15.2%) Ecuadorians, and 78 (5.7%) from other countries. 27% of providers suffered middle-higher acute stress due to the outbreak. Worse results were observed in moments of peak incidence of cases (14.3 ± 5.3 vs. 6.9 ± 1.7, p < 0.05). Higher scores were found in professionals in COVID-19 critical care (13 ± 1.2) than those in non-COVID-19 areas (10.7 ± 1.9) (p = 0.03). Distress was higher among professionals who were COVID-19 patients (11.7 ± 1) or had doubts about their potential infection (12 ± 1.2) compared to those not infected (9.5 ± 0.7) (p = 0.001). Around one-third of the professionals experienced acute stress, increasing in intensity as the incidence of COVID-19 increased and as they became infected or in doubt whether they were infected. EASE scale could be a valuable asset for monitoring acute stress levels among health professionals in Latin America.Fil: Martin Delgado, Jimmy. Universidad Catolica de Santiago de Guayaquil; EcuadorFil: Poblete, Rodrigo. Universidad de Santiago de Chile; ChileFil: Serpa, Piedad. Universidad Industrial Santander; ColombiaFil: Mula, Aurora. Hospital Universitario de Sant Joan D´alacant; EspañaFil: Carrillo, Irene. Universidad de Miguel Hernández; EspañaFil: Fernández, Cesar. Universidad de Miguel Hernández; EspañaFil: Vicente Ripoll, María Asunción. Universidad de Miguel Hernández; EspañaFil: Loudet, Cecilia. General José de San Martín de la Plata General Hospital; ArgentinaFil: Jorro, Facundo. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital General de Niños Pedro Elizalde (ex Casa Cuna); ArgentinaFil: Garcia Elorrio, Ezequiel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública; ArgentinaFil: Guilabert, Mercedes. Universidad de Miguel Hernández; EspañaFil: Mira, José Joaquín. Universidad de Miguel Hernández; Españ

Proposal of a clinical care pathway for quality and safe management of headache patients: a consensus study report

Background Headache is one of the most prevalent and disabling conditions. Its optimal management requires a coordinated and comprehensive response by health systems, but there is still a wide variability that compromises the quality and safety of the care process. Purpose To establish the basis for designing a care pathway for headache patients through identifying key subpathways in the care process and setting out quality and clinical safety standards that contribute to providing comprehensive, adequate and safe healthcare. Method A qualitative research study based on the consensus conference technique. Eleven professionals from the Spanish National Health System participated, seven of them with clinical experience in headache and four specialists in healthcare management and quality. First, identification of the key subpathways in the care process for headache, barriers/limitations for optimal quality of care, and quality and safety standards applied in each subpathway. Second, two consecutive consensus rounds were carried out to assess the content of the subpathway level descriptors, until the expert agreement was reached. Third, findings were assessed by 17 external healthcare professionals to determine their understanding, adequacy and usefulness. Results Seven key subpathways were identified: (1) primary care, (2) emergency department, (3) neurology department, (4) specialised headache unit, (5) hospitalisation, (6) outpatients and (7) governance and management. Sixty-seventh barriers were identified, the most frequent being related to diagnostic errors (36,1%), resource deficiency (25%), treatment errors (19,4%), lack of health literacy (13,9%) and inadequate communications with care transitions (5,6%). Fifty-nine quality and 31 safety standards were defined. They were related to evaluation (23.3%), patient safety (21.1%), comprehensive care (12.2%), treatment (12.2%), clinical practice guidelines (7.8%), counselling (6.7%), training (4.4%) and patient satisfaction (3.3%). Conclusions This proposal incorporates a set of indicators and standards, which can be used to define a pathway for headache patients and determine the levels of quality

Increased Th17-Related Cytokine Serum Levels in Patients With Multiple Polyps of Unexplained Origin

OBJECTIVES: Most patientswith multiple colonic polyps do not have a known genetic or hereditary origin. Our aim was to analyze the presence of inflammatory cytokines and levels of glucose, insulin, and C-reactive protein (CRP) in patients with multiple colonic polyps. METHODS: Eighty-three patients with 10 or more adenomatous or serrated polyps and 53 control people with normal colonoscopy were included. Smoking habits were registered, and glucose, CRP, and basal insulin in the serum/blood weremeasured. Quantification of IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-10, IL-11, IL-17A, and IL-23 cytokine levels in the serum was performed by a high-sensitivity enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. RESULTS: Smoking and diabetesweremore prevalent in those with colonic polyps than in the control people (67% vs 16%, P = 0.001; 11% vs 2%, P = 0.048). In addition, the cytokine serum levels were higher, i.e., IL-2 (P = 0.001), IL-4 (P = 0.001), IL-6 (P = 0.001), IL-17A (P = 0.001), IL-23 (P = 0.014), and CRP (P = 0.003). Adjusting for sex, smoking, and diabetes in amultivariate analysis, IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-17A, and IL-23 remained independently elevated in cases with multiple polyps. DISCUSSION: These results indicate that immune responses mediated by Th17 cells may be involved in the pathogenesis of multiple colonic polyps