In the aftermath of medical error : Caring for patients, family, and the healthcare workers involved

Medical errors, in particular those resulting in harm, pose a serious situation for patients ("first victims") and the healthcare workers involved ("second victims") and can have long-lasting and distressing consequences. To prevent a second traumatization, appropriate and empathic interaction with all persons involved is essential besides error analysis. Patients share a nearly universal, broad preference for a complete disclosure of incidents, regardless of age, gender, or education. This includes the personal, timely and unambiguous disclosure of the adverse event, information relating to the event, its causes and consequences, and an apology and sincere expression of regret. While the majority of healthcare professionals generally support and honest and open disclosure of adverse events, they also face various barriers which impede the disclosure (e.g., fear of legal consequences). Despite its essential importance, disclosure of adverse events in practice occurs in ways that are rarely acceptable to patients and their families. The staff involved often experiences acute distress and an intense emotional response to the event, which may become chronic and increase the risk of depression, burnout and post-traumatic stress disorders. Communication with peers is vital for people to be able to cope constructively and protectively with harmful errors. Survey studies among healthcare workers show, however, that they often do not receive sufficient individual and institutional support. Healthcare organizations should prepare for medical errors and harmful events and implement a communication plan and a support system that covers the requirements and different needs of patients and the staff involved.

Written survey on recently deceased patients in germany and switzerland: how do general practitioners see their role?

BACKGROUND General practitioners (GPs) play an important role in end-of-life care due to their proximity to the patient's dwelling-place and their contact to relatives and other care providers. METHODS In order to get a better understanding of the role which the GP sees him- or herself as playing in end-of-life care and which care their dying patients get, we conducted this written survey. It asked questions about the most recently deceased patient of each physician. The questionnaire was sent to 1,201 GPs in southern North Rhine-Westphalia (Germany) and the Canton of Bern (Switzerland). RESULTS Response rate was 27.5 % (n = 330). The average age of responding physicians was 54.5 years (range: 34-76; standard derivation: 7.4), 68 % of them were male and 45 % worked alone in their practice. Primary outcome measures of this observational study are the characteristics of recently deceased patients as well as their care and the involvement of other professional caregivers. Almost half of the most recently deceased patients had cancer. Only 3 to 16 % of all deceased suffered from severe levels of pain, nausea, dyspnea or emesis. More than 80 % of the doctors considered themselves to be an indispensable part of their patient's end-of-life care. Almost 90 % of the doctors were in contact with the patient's family and 50 % with the responsible nursing service. The majority of the GPs had taken over the coordination of care and cooperation with other attending physicians. CONCLUSION The study confirms the relevance of caring for dying patients in GPs work and provides an important insight into their perception of their own role.

Heterogeneity in testing practices for infections during pregnancy: national survey across Switzerland.

QUESTION Detection and treatment of infections during pregnancy are important for both maternal and child health. The objective of this study was to describe testing practices and adherence to current national guidelines in Switzerland. METHODS We invited all registered practicing obstetricians and gynaecologists in Switzerland to complete an anonymous web-based questionnaire about strategies for testing for 14 infections during pregnancy. We conducted a descriptive analysis according to demographic characteristics. RESULTS Of 1138 invited clinicians, 537 (47.2%) responded and 520 (45.6%) were eligible as they are currently caring for pregnant women. Nearly all eligible respondents tested all pregnant women for group B streptococcus (98.0%), hepatitis B virus (HBV) (96.5%) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (94.7%), in accordance with national guidelines. Although testing for toxoplasmosis is not recommended, 24.1% of respondents tested all women and 32.9% tested at the request of the patient. Hospital doctors were more likely not to test for toxoplasmosis than doctors working in private practice (odds ratio [OR] 2.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-6.13, p = 0.04). Only 80.4% of respondents tested all women for syphilis. There were regional differences in testing for some infections. The proportion of clinicians testing all women for HIV, HBV and syphilis was lower in Eastern Switzerland and the Zurich region (69.4% and 61.2%, respectively) than in other regions (range 77.1-88.1%, p <0.001). Most respondents (74.5%) said they would appreciate national guidelines about testing for infections during pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS Testing practices for infections in pregnant women vary widely in Switzerland. More extensive national guidelines could improve consistency of testing practices.