Adoption of new health products in low and middle income settings: how product development partnerships can support country decision making

When a new health product becomes available, countries have a choice to adopt the product into their national health systems or to pursue an alternate strategy to address the public health problem. Here, we describe the role for product development partnerships (PDPs) in supporting this decision-making process. PDPs are focused on developing new products to respond to health problems prevalent in low and middle income settings. The impact of these products within public sector health systems can only be realized after a country policy process. PDPs may be the organizations most familiar with the evidence which assists decision making, and this generally translates into involvement in international policy development, but PDPs have limited reach into endemic countries. In a few individual countries, there may be more extensive involvement in tracking adoption activities and generating local evidence. This local PDP involvement begins with geographical prioritization based on disease burden, relationships established during clinical trials, PDP in-country resources, and other factors. Strategies adopted by PDPs to establish a presence in endemic countries vary from the opening of country offices to engagement of part-time consultants or with long-term or ad hoc committees. Once a PDP commits to support country decision making, the approaches vary, but include country consultations, regional meetings, formation of regional, product-specific committees, support of in-country advocates, development of decision-making frameworks, provision of technical assistance to aid therapeutic or diagnostic guideline revision, and conduct of stakeholder and Phase 4 studies. To reach large numbers of countries, the formation of partnerships, particularly with WHO, are essential. At this early stage, impact data are limited. But available evidence suggests PDPs can and do play an important catalytic role in their support of country decision making in a number of target countries

Diseño y validación mediante la Teoría de Respuesta al Ítem del Instrumento para Evaluar Capital Psicológico en las Organizaciones IPSICAP

16 p.El constructo “capital psicológico”, creado por Fred Luthans, se define como un estado de desarrollo psicológico positivo del ser humano, que lo caracteriza por (a) tener confianza (autoeficacia) para realizar los esfuerzos que sean necesarios con el fin de alcanzar el éxito en tareas retadoras; (b) hacer atribuciones de causalidad positivas (optimismo) acerca de los sucesos presentes y futuros; (c) perseverar en el logro de los objetivos y, cuando sea necesario, redireccionar los caminos para alcanzarlos (esperanza) de manera exitosa; y (d) al ser blanco de los problemas y la adversidad, mantenerse en pie, volver a comenzar e ir más allá (resiliencia) para lograr el éxito (Luthans, Youssef & Avolio, 2007a, 2007b). Este constructo ha surgido a partir de investigación empírica dentro del comportamiento organizacional positivo, y se ha identificado como un factor nuclear (core factor) de segundo orden (Avey, Patera & West, 2006). Específicamente, las bases teóricas de sus cuatro componentes tienen origen en la psicología clínica, y la aplicación al contexto laboral ha sido realizada principalmente por Fred Luthans, Carolyn Youssef y Bruce Avolio (Luthans & Avolio, 2003; Luthans, Avolio, Walumbwa & Li, 2005); aunque también ha sido trabajado por el grupo de investigación WoNT-Work and Organizational Network, dirigido por Marisa Salanova, en España.Introducción Método Resultados Discusión Referencia

A survey of community members' perceptions of medical errors in Oman

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Errors have been the concern of providers and consumers of health care services. However, consumers' perception of medical errors in developing countries is rarely explored. The aim of this study is to assess community members' perceptions about medical errors and to analyse the factors affecting this perception in one Middle East country, Oman.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Face to face interviews were conducted with heads of 212 households in two villages in North Al-Batinah region of Oman selected because of close proximity to the Sultan Qaboos University (SQU), Muscat, Oman. Participants' perceived knowledge about medical errors was assessed. Responses were coded and categorised. Analyses were performed using Pearson's χ², Fisher's exact tests, and multivariate logistic regression model wherever appropriate.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Seventy-eight percent (n = 165) of participants believed they knew what was meant by medical errors. Of these, 34% and 26.5% related medical errors to wrong medications or diagnoses, respectively. Understanding of medical errors was correlated inversely with age and positively with family income. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that a one-year increase in age was associated with a 4% reduction in perceived knowledge of medical errors (CI: 1% to 7%; p = 0.045). The study found that 49% of those who believed they knew the meaning of medical errors had experienced such errors. The most common consequence of the errors was severe pain (45%). Of the 165 informed participants, 49% felt that an uncaring health care professional was the main cause of medical errors. Younger participants were able to list more possible causes of medical errors than were older subjects (Incident Rate Ratio of 0.98; p < 0.001).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The majority of participants believed they knew the meaning of medical errors. Younger participants were more likely to be aware of such errors and could list one or more causes.</p