Approximation of fixed points of nonexpansive mappings and quasinonexpansive mappings in a Hilbert space

In this paper, we give a simple proof and some generalizations of results in Falset, Llorens-Fuster, Marino, and Rugiano (2016).Comment: 8 page

Healthcare Students and Medical Residents as Second Victims: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background: The term second victim (SV) describes healthcare professionals who remain traumatized after being involved in a patient safety incident (PSI). They can experience various emotional, psychological, and physical symptoms. The phenomenon is quite common; it has been estimated that half of hospital workers will be an SV at least once in their career. Because recent literature has reported high prevalence (>30%) among nursing students, we studied the phenomenon among the whole population of healthcare students. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study with an online questionnaire among nursing students, medical students, and resident physicians at the teaching hospital of the University of the Piemonte Orientale located in Novara, Italy. The study included 387 individuals: 128 nursing students, 174 medical students, and 85 residents. Results: We observed an overall PSI prevalence rate of 25.58% (lowest in medical students, 14.37%; highest in residents, 43.53%). Of these, 62.63% experienced symptoms typical of an SV. The most common temporary symptom was the feeling of working badly (51.52%), whereas the most common lasting symptom was hypervigilance (51.52%). Notably, none of the resident physicians involved in a PSI spoke to the patient or the patient's relatives. Conclusion: Our findings highlighted the risk incurred by healthcare students of becoming an SV, with a possible significant impact on their future professional and personal lives. Therefore, we suggest that academic institutions should play a more proactive role in providing support to those involved in a PSI

Duration of second victim symptoms in the aftermath of a patient safety incident and association with the level of patient harm: A cross-sectional study in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVES: To describe healthcare providers' symptoms evoked by patient safety incidents (PSIs), the duration of these symptoms and the association with the degree of patient harm caused by the incident. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: 32 Dutch hospitals that participate in the 'Peer Support Collaborative'. PARTICIPANTS: 4369 healthcare providers (1619 doctors and 2750 nurses) involved in a PSI at any time during their career. INTERVENTIONS: All doctors and nurses working in direct patient care in the 32 participating hospitals were invited via email to participate in an online survey. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence of symptoms, symptom duration and its relationship with the degree of patient harm. RESULTS: In total 4369 respondents were involved in a PSI and completely filled in the questionnaire. Of these, 462 reported having been involved in a PSI with permanent harm or death during the last 6 months. This had a personal, professional impact as well as impact on effective teamwork requirements. The impact of a PSI increased when the degree of patient harm was more severe. The most common symptom was hypervigilance (53.0%). The three most common symptoms related to teamwork were having doubts about knowledge and skill (27.0%), feeling unable to provide quality care (15.6%) and feeling uncomfortable within the team (15.5%). PSI with permanent harm or death was related to eightfold higher likelihood of provider-related symptoms lasting for more than 1\u2009month and ninefold lasting longer than 6\u2009months compared with symptoms reported when the PSI caused no harm. CONCLUSION: The impact of PSI remains an underestimated problem. The higher the degree of harm, the longer the symptoms last. Future studies should evaluate how these data can be integrated in evidence-based support systems

The “House of Trust”. A framework for quality healthcare and leadership. [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]

In healthcare, improvement leaders have been inspired by the frameworks from industry which have been adapted into control systems and certifications to improve quality of care for people. To address the challenge to regain trust in healthcare design and delivery, we propose a conceptual framework, i.e. the “House of Trust”. This House brings together the Juran Trilogy, the emerging concept of co-production in quality management and the multidimensional definition of quality, which describes core values as an integral part of the system to deliver person- and kin-centered care. In the “House of Trust” patients, their kin, healthcare providers, executives and managers feel at home, with a sense of belonging. If we want to build a care organization that inspires and radiates confidence to all stakeholders, highlighting the basic interactions between front- and back-office is required. An organization with both well-organized back- and front-offices can enable all to benefit from the trust each of them needs and deserves. A quality system does not depend on government inspection and regulations nor on external accreditation to develop itself into a House of Trust. Success will only be achieved if all involved continuously question themselves about the technical dimensions of quality and their core values during the “moment of truth”

The European Researchers’ Network Working on Second Victim (ERNST) policy statement on the second victim phenomenon for increasing patient safety

Publisher Copyright: Copyright © 2024 Mira, Carillo, Tella, Vanhaecht, Panella, Seys, Ungureanu, Sousa, Buttigieg, Vella-Bonanno, Popovici, Srulovici, Guerra-Paiva, Knezevic, Lorenzo, Lachman, Ushiro, Scott, Wu and Strametz.Background: The second victim phenomenon refers to the emotional trauma healthcare professionals experience following adverse events (AEs) in patient care, which can compromise their ability to provide safe care. This issue has significant implications for patient safety, with AEs leading to substantial human and economic costs. Analysis: Current evidence indicates that AEs often result from systemic failures, profoundly affecting healthcare workers. While patient safety initiatives are in place, the psychological impact on healthcare professionals remains inadequately addressed. The European Researchers’ Network Working on Second Victims (ERNST) emphasizes the need to support these professionals through peer support programs, systemic changes, and a shift toward a just culture in healthcare settings. Policy Options: Key options include implementing peer support programs, revising the legal framework to decriminalize honest errors, and promoting just culture principles. These initiatives aim to mitigate the second victim phenomenon, enhance patient safety, and reduce healthcare costs. Conclusion: Addressing the second victim phenomenon is essential for ensuring patient safety. By implementing supportive policies and fostering a just culture, healthcare systems can better manage the repercussions of AEs and support the wellbeing of healthcare professionals.publishersversionpublishe

How different countries respond to adverse events whilst patients’ rights are protected

Patient safety is high on the policy agenda internationally. Learning from safety incidents is a core component in achieving the important goal of increasing patient safety. This study explores the legal frameworks in the countries to promote reporting, disclosure, and supporting healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in safety incidents. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted to ascertain an overview of the legal frameworks at national level, as well as relevant policies. ERNST (The European Researchers’ Network Working on Second Victims) group peerreviewed data collected from countries was performed to validate information. Information from 27 countries was collected and analyzed, giving a response rate of 60%. A reporting system for patient safety incidents was in place in 85.2% (N = 23) of countries surveyed, though few (37%, N= 10) were focused on systems-learning. In about half of the countries (48.1%, N= 13) open disclosure depends on the initiative of HCPs. The tort liability system was common in most countries. No-fault compensation schemes and alternative forms of redress were less common. Support for HCPs involved in patient safety incidents was extremely limited, with just 11.1% (N = 3) of participating countries reporting that supports were available in all healthcare institutions. Despite progress in the patient safety movement worldwide, the findings suggest that there are considerable differences in the approach to the reporting and disclosure of patient safety incidents. Additionally, models of compensation vary limiting patients’ access to redress. Finally, the results highlight the need for comprehensive support for HCPs involved in safety incidents.peer-reviewe

The European researchers’ network working on second victim (ERNST) policy statement on the second victim phenomenon for increasing patient safety

Background: The second victim phenomenon refers to the emotional trauma healthcare professionals experience following adverse events (AEs) in patient care, which can compromise their ability to provide safe care. This issue has significant implications for patient safety, with AEs leading to substantial human and economic costs. Analysis: Current evidence indicates that AEs often result from systemic failures, profoundly affecting healthcare workers. While patient safety initiatives are in place, the psychological impact on healthcare professionals remains inadequately addressed. The European Researchers’ Network Working on Second Victims (ERNST) emphasizes the need to support these professionals through peer support programs, systemic changes, and a shift toward a just culture in healthcare settings. Policy Options: Key options include implementing peer support programs, revising the legal framework to decriminalize honest errors, and promoting just culture principles. These initiatives aim to mitigate the second victim phenomenon, enhance patient safety, and reduce healthcare costs. Conclusion: Addressing the second victim phenomenon is essential for ensuring patient safety. By implementing supportive policies and fostering a just culture, healthcare systems can better manage the repercussions of AEs and support the wellbeing of healthcare professionals.peer-reviewe

Understanding the impact of care pathways on adherence to guidelines, patient outcomes and teamwork

Research showed that the adherence to clinical guidelines is low and highly variable across medical conditions and hospitals. During the last 10 years, care pathways have been introduced as one of the methods to reduce variation in care by increasing the adherence to clinical guidelines. Care pathways are defined as 'complex interventions for a well-defined group of patients during a well-defined period. The development and implementation of a care pathway is based on multidisciplinary teamwork, understanding the practical organization of care and the integration of a set of evidence based key interventions'. Care pathways research has several limitations. First of all, it’s hard to compare the adherence to guidelines and outcomes of different care pathways for a specific pathology because there is large variation in the implemented key interventions. Second, the effect of care pathways on the adherence to guidelines and in reducing the variation in clinical practice is not inclusive. Until now, no international prospective research has been performed to analyze the impact of care pathways on the adherence to clinical guidelines and to identify determinants which have an impact on the adherence to guidelines. Therefore, in this PhD study, we will analyse the impact of care pathways on the adherence to clinical guidelines based on international data on process, outcomes, team and organization for a surgical condition, patients with a proximal femur fracture, and a non-surgical condition, patients with a COPD exacerbation.status: publishe

The Care Process Self-Evaluation Tool: a valid and reliable instrument for measuring care process organization of health care teams

Background: Patient safety can be increased by improving the organization of care. A tool that evaluates the actual organization of care, as perceived by multidisciplinary teams, is the Care Process Self-Evaluation Tool (CPSET). CPSET was developed in 2007 and includes 29 items in five subscales: (a) patient-focused organization, (b) coordination of the care process, (c) collaboration with primary care, (d) communication with patients and family, and (e) follow-up of the care process. The goal of the present study was to further evaluate the psychometric properties of the CPSET at the team and hospital levels and to compile a cutoff score table. Methods: The psychometric properties of the CPSET were assessed in a multicenter study in Belgium and the Netherlands. In total, 3139 team members from 114 hospitals participated. Psychometric properties were evaluated by using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Cronbach’s alpha, interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), Kruskall-Wallis test, and Mann–Whitney test. For the cutoff score table, percentiles were used. Demographic variables were also evaluated. Results: CFA showed a good model fit: a normed fit index of 0.93, a comparative fit index of 0.94, an adjusted goodness-of-fit index of 0.87, and a root mean square error of approximation of 0.06. Cronbach’s alpha values were between 0.869 and 0.950. The team-level ICCs varied between 0.127 and 0.232 and were higher than those at the hospital level (0.071-0.151). Male team members scored significantly higher than females on 2 of the 5 subscales and on the overall CPSET. There were also significant differences among age groups. Medical doctors scored significantly higher on 4 of the 5 subscales and on the overall CPSET. Coordinators of care processes scored significantly lower on 2 of the 5 subscales and on the overall CPSET. Cutoff scores for all subscales and the overall CPSET were calculated. Conclusions: The CPSET is a valid and reliable instrument for health care teams to measure the extent care processes are organized. The cutoff table permits teams to compare how they perceive the organization of their care process relative to other teams