Marital breakup in later adulthood and self-rated health: a cross-sectional survey in Switzerland

Objectives This research examines the impact of relationship status on self-rated health (SRH) by taking into account intrapersonal and social resources. Methods Data stem from a Swiss-based survey of 1355 participants aged 40–65 years. Three groups are compared: continuously married (n = 399), single divorcees (n = 532) and repartnered divorcees (n = 424). Linear regression models are used to examine the predictive role of relationship status on SRH and to investigate the moderating role of intrapersonal and social resources on SRH. Results Single divorcees show the lowest SRH scores, whereas their repartnered counterparts reported scores comparable to the continuously married—even after controlling for socio-demographic and economic variables. Although single divorcees reported higher levels of loneliness and agreeableness in addition to lower levels of resilience when compared with the other groups, none of these variables had a significant moderation effect on SRH. Conclusions Our results underscore the positive effect of relationship status on SRH, and contribute new insights on the impact of later-life divorce. Given the growing number of divorcees, related public health challenges are likely to increase.

Disclosing and reporting medical errors: Cross-sectional survey of Swiss anaesthesiologists.

BACKGROUND There is limited research on anaesthesiologists' attitudes and experiences regarding medical error communication, particularly concerning disclosing errors to patients. OBJECTIVE To characterise anaesthesiologists' attitudes and experiences regarding disclosing errors to patients and reporting errors within the hospital, and to examine factors influencing their willingness to disclose or report errors. DESIGN Cross-sectional survey. SETTING Switzerland's five university hospitals' departments of anaesthesia in 2012/2013. PARTICIPANTS Two hundred and eighty-one clinically active anaesthesiologists. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Anaesthesiologists' attitudes and experiences regarding medical error communication. RESULTS The overall response rate of the survey was 52% (281/542). Respondents broadly endorsed disclosing harmful errors to patients (100% serious, 77% minor errors, 19% near misses), but also reported factors that might make them less likely to actually disclose such errors. Only 12% of respondents had previously received training on how to disclose errors to patients, although 93% were interested in receiving training. Overall, 97% of respondents agreed that serious errors should be reported, but willingness to report minor errors (74%) and near misses (59%) was lower. Respondents were more likely to strongly agree that serious errors should be reported if they also thought that their hospital would implement systematic changes after errors were reported [(odds ratio, 2.097 (95% confidence interval, 1.16 to 3.81)]. Significant differences in attitudes between departments regarding error disclosure and reporting were noted. CONCLUSION Willingness to disclose or report errors varied widely between hospitals. Thus, heads of department and hospital chiefs need to be aware of the importance of local culture when it comes to error communication. Error disclosure training and improving feedback on how error reports are being used to improve patient safety may also be important steps in increasing anaesthesiologists' communication of errors.

Population-based cross -sectional survey on intestinal helminth infections with a focus on taeniasis among residents of El Paso, Texas and Ciudad Juarez, Mexico

Few studies have been conducted on the epidemiology of enteric infectious diseases of public health importance in communities along the United States-Mexico border, and these studies typically focus on bacterial and viral diseases. The epidemiology of intestinal helminth infections along the border has not recently been explored, and there are no published reports for El Paso and Ciudad Juarez, both of which are high traffic urban areas along the Texas-Mexico border. The purpose of this research project was to conduct a cross-sectional epidemiologic survey for enteric helminths of medical importance along the Texas-Mexico border region of El Paso and Ciudad Juarez and to evaluate risk factors for exposure to these parasites. In addition, an emphasis was placed on the zoonotic tapeworm, Taenia solium. This tapeworm is especially important in this region because of the increasing incidence of neurocysticercosis, a severe disease spread by carriers of intestinal T. solium. Fecal samples were collected from individuals of all ages in a population-based cross-sectional household survey and evaluated for the presence of helminth parasites using fecal flotations. In addition, a Taenia coproantigen enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was performed on each stool sample to identify tapeworm carriers. A standardized questionnaire was administered to identify risk factors and routes of exposure for enteric helminth infections with additional questions to assess risk factors specific for taeniasis. The actual prevalence of taeniasis along the Texas-Mexico border was unknown, and this is the first population-based study performed in this region. Flotations were performed on 395 samples and four (1%) were positive for helminths including Ascaris, hookworms and Taenia species. Immunodiagnostic testing demonstrated a prevalence of 2.9% (11/378) for taeniasis. Based on the case definition, a 3% (12/395) prevalence of taeniasis was detected in this area. In addition, statistical analyses indicate that residents of El Paso are 8.5 times more likely to be a tapeworm carrier compared to residents of Juarez (PR=8.5, 95% CI=2.35, 30.81). This finding has important implications in terms of planning effective health education campaigns to decrease the prevalence of enteric helminths in populations along the Texas-Mexico border. ^

Medication double-checking procedures in clinical practice: a cross-sectional survey of oncology nurses' experiences.

BACKGROUND Double-checking is widely recommended as an essential method to prevent medication errors. However, prior research has shown that the concept of double-checking is not clearly defined, and that little is known about actual practice in oncology, for example, what kind of checking procedures are applied. OBJECTIVE To study the practice of different double-checking procedures in chemotherapy administration and to explore nurses' experiences, for example, how often they actually find errors using a certain procedure. General evaluations regarding double-checking, for example, frequency of interruptions during and caused by a check, or what is regarded as its essential feature was assessed. METHODS In a cross-sectional survey, qualified nurses working in oncology departments of 3 hospitals were asked to rate 5 different scenarios of double-checking procedures regarding dimensions such as frequency of use in practice and appropriateness to prevent medication errors; they were also asked general questions about double-checking. RESULTS Overall, 274 nurses (70% response rate) participated in the survey. The procedure of jointly double-checking (read-read back) was most commonly used (69% of respondents) and rated as very appropriate to prevent medication errors. Jointly checking medication was seen as the essential characteristic of double-checking-more frequently than 'carrying out checks independently' (54% vs 24%). Most nurses (78%) found the frequency of double-checking in their department appropriate. Being interrupted in one's own current activity for supporting a double-check was reported to occur frequently. Regression analysis revealed a strong preference towards checks that are currently implemented at the responders' workplace. CONCLUSIONS Double-checking is well regarded by oncology nurses as a procedure to help prevent errors, with jointly checking being used most frequently. Our results show that the notion of independent checking needs to be transferred more actively into clinical practice. The high frequency of reported interruptions during and caused by double-checks is of concern.