Comparison of the prevalence and characteristics of inpatient adverse events using medical records review and incident reporting

Background. Information on adverse events (AEs) in hospitalised patients in developing countries is scanty.Objective. To compare the magnitude and characteristics of inpatient AEs in a tertiary, not-for-profit healthcare facility in Kenya, using medical records review and incident reporting.Methods. Estimation of prevalence was done using incidents reported in 2010 from a random sample of medical records for hospital admissions. Nurse reviewers used 18 screening criteria, followed by physician reviewers to confirm occurrence. An AE was defined as an unexpected clinical event (UE) associated with death, disability or prolonged hospitalisation not explained by the disease condition. The kappa statistic was used to estimate inter-rater agreement, and analysis was done using logistic regression.Results. The study identified 53 UEs from 2 000 randomly selected medical records and 33 reported UEs from 23 026 admissions in the index year. The prevalences of AEs from medical records review and incident reports were 1.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.9 - 2.0) and 0.03% (95% CI 0.012 - 0.063), respectively. Compared with incident reporting, review of medical records identified more disability (13.2% v. 0%; p=0.03) and prolonged hospital stays (43.4% v. 18.2%; p=0.02).Conclusions. Review of medical records is preferable to incident reporting in determining the prevalence of AEs in health facilities with limited inpatient quality improvement experience. Further research is needed to determine whether staff education and a positive culture change through promotion of non-punitive UE reporting or a combination of approaches would improve the comprehensiveness of AE reporting

Comparison of the prevalence and characteristics of inpatient adverse events using medical records review and incident reporting

Background. Information on adverse events (AEs) in hospitalised patients in developing countries is scanty.Objective. To compare the magnitude and characteristics of inpatient AEs in a tertiary, not-for-profit healthcare facility in Kenya, using medical records review and incident reporting.Methods. Estimation of prevalence was done using incidents reported in 2010 from a random sample of medical records for hospital admissions. Nurse reviewers used 18 screening criteria, followed by physician reviewers to confirm occurrence. An AE was defined as an unexpected clinical event (UE) associated with death, disability or prolonged hospitalisation not explained by the disease condition. The kappa statistic was used to estimate inter-rater agreement, and analysis was done using logistic regression.Results. The study identified 53 UEs from 2 000 randomly selected medical records and 33 reported UEs from 23 026 admissions in the index year. The prevalences of AEs from medical records review and incident reports were 1.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.9 - 2.0) and 0.03% (95% CI 0.012 - 0.063), respectively. Compared with incident reporting, review of medical records identified more disability (13.2% v. 0%; p=0.03) and prolonged hospital stays (43.4% v. 18.2%; p=0.02).Conclusions. Review of medical records is preferable to incident reporting in determining the prevalence of AEs in health facilities with limited inpatient quality improvement experience. Further research is needed to determine whether staff education and a positive culture change through promotion of non-punitive UE reporting or a combination of approaches would improve the comprehensiveness of AE reporting

Ovarian response and follow-up outcomes in women diagnosed with cancer having fertility preservation: Comparison of random start and early follicular phase stimulation: cohort study

Objectives To determine response to controlled ovarian stimulation in a random start cycle and utilisation of cryopreserved oocytes and embryos in cancer patients. Study Design A retrospective cohort study was carried out in an assisted reproductive treatment centre. Participants included 137 cancer patients who underwent controlled ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation between 1 Feb 2003 and 30 June 2016. The primary outcome variable was number of oocytes retrieved. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed, and differences compared using Chi squared test and student t-test as appropriate. P <  0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Using the antagonist protocol, there was no difference in number of oocytes retrieved between the early follicular phase or at random start stimulation; 11.9 (95% CI 10.3–13.5) and 12.9 (95% CI 9.6–16.2), P =  0.602, respectively. Similarly, the number of embryos frozen was comparable between those starting stimulation in early follicular and random phase, 6.7 (95% CI 5.7–7.7) and 5.1 (95% CI 3.6–6.5), P= 0.1508 respectively. Among patients undergoing fertility preservation, those who returned to attempt a pregnancy had an ongoing pregnancy rate of 24.3%. Overall, 65% of oocytes and embryos were still in storage, however, 16 (11.7%) had elected to have their oocytes or embryos disposed of. Conclusion(s) For women faced with potential gonadotoxic treatment and requiring urgent fertility preservation, ovarian stimulation with the antagonist protocol can be started at random without compromising ovarian response. Pregnancy rates following utilisation of frozen-thawed oocytes and embryos are promising, however, more research is needed to understand reasons underlying disposition of oocytes and embryos especially when survival following cancer treatment has improved significantly

Medicalized Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: Contentious Practices and Persistent Debates

Purpose of Review: Female genital cutting/mutilation (FGM/C) performed by health care professionals (medicalization) and reduced severity of cutting have been advanced as strategies for minimizing health risks, sparking acrimonious ongoing debates. This study summarizes key debates and critically assesses supporting evidence. Recent Findings: While medicalization is concentrated in Africa, health professionals worldwide have faced requests to perform FGM/C. Whether medicalization is hindering the decline of FGM/C is unclear. Factors motivating medicalization include, but are not limited to, safety concerns. Involvement of health professionals in advocacy to end FGM/C can address both the supply and demand side of medicalization, but raises ethical concerns regarding dual loyalty. Ongoing debates need to address competing rights claims. Summary: Polarizing debates have brought little resolution. We call for a focus on common goals of protecting the health and welfare of girls living in communities where FGM/C is upheld and encourage more informed and open dialog