17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Conocimiento y uso de mecanismos de coordinación clínica de servicios de salud de Latinoamérica Translated title: Knowledge and use of clinical coordination mechanisms in healthcare networks in Latin America

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Resumen Objetivo Analizar el nivel de conocimiento y uso, y las características del uso, de los mecanismos de coordinación clínica entre niveles de atención en redes de servicios de salud de seis países de Latinoamérica. Método Estudio transversal mediante encuesta, usando el cuestionario COORDENA®, a médicos de atención primaria y especializada (tamaño estimado: 348 médicos/país) de redes sanitarias públicas de Argentina, Brasil, Chile, Colombia, México y Uruguay (mayo-octubre 2015). Variables analizadas: conocimiento y uso de mecanismos de coordinación de la información (hoja de referencia/contrarreferencia-interconsulta [HRCR], informe de alta hospitalaria, teléfono, correo electrónico) y de la gestión clínica (guías de práctica clínica y reuniones conjuntas). Se realizó un análisis descriptivo. Resultados El conocimiento de los mecanismos de coordinación de la información es alto en ambos niveles de atención en las redes analizadas, así como también el uso de la HRCR. Existe mayor variabilidad en el envío del informe de alta hospitalaria (del 40,0% en Brasil al 79,4% en México) y, excepto en Argentina, destaca su baja recepción por los médicos de atención primaria (12,3% en Colombia y 55,1% en Uruguay). En cambio, el conocimiento de los mecanismos de coordinación de la gestión clínica es limitado, en especial entre los médicos de atención especializada. Llama la atención la alta adherencia a las guías de práctica clínica (del 83,1% en México al 96,8% en Brasil), mientras que la participación en reuniones conjuntas varía ampliamente (del 23,7% en Chile al 76,2% en Brasil). Las dificultades para la utilización de los mecanismos se refieren a factores estructurales y organizativos. Conclusiones El conocimiento y el uso limitados de los mecanismos de coordinación parecen reflejar su escasa difusión e implementación. Son necesarias estrategias que promuevan su uso, interviniendo sobre los factores determinantes.

          Translated abstract

          Abstract Objective To analyze the level of knowledge and use, and the characteristics of use, of care coordination mechanisms in public healthcare networks of six Latin America countries. Method Cross-sectional study based on a survey using the COORDENA® questionnaire with primary and secondary care doctors (348 doctors/country) of public healthcare networks in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Uruguay (May-October 2015). Analyzed variables: degree of knowledge and use of information coordination (referral/reply letter, discharge report, phone, e-mail) and of clinical management coordination (shared clinical guidelines, joint meetings) mechanisms. Descriptive analyses were conducted. Results Knowledge of clinical information coordination mechanisms was high in both care levels and analyzed networks as was the use of referral/reply letter. There was greater variability in the use of discharge reports (from 40.0% in Brazil to 79.4% in Mexico) and, except for Argentina, a low reception reported by primary care doctors stands out (12.3% in Colombia and 55.1% in Uruguay). In contrast, knowledge of clinical management coordination mechanisms was limited, especially among secondary care doctors. It is noteworthy, however, that adherence to clinical guidelines was high (from 83.1% in Mexico to 96.8% in Brazil), while participation in joint meetings varied widely (from 23.7% in Chile to 76.2% in Brazil). The difficulties reported in the use of the mechanisms are related to structural and organizational factors. Conclusions The limited knowledge and use of coordination mechanisms shows insufficient diffusion and implementation. Strategies to increase its use are needed, including the related factors.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Communication in healthcare: a narrative review of the literature and practical recommendations

          Summary Objectives Effective and efficient communication is crucial in healthcare. Written communication remains the most prevalent form of communication between specialised and primary care. We aimed at reviewing the literature on the quality of written communication, the impact of communication inefficiencies and recommendations to improve written communication in healthcare. Design Narrative literature review. Methods A search was carried out on the databases PubMed, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library by means of the (MeSH)terms ‘communication’, ‘primary health care’, ‘correspondence’, ‘patient safety’, ‘patient handoff’ and ‘continuity of patient care’. Reviewers screened 4609 records and 462 full texts were checked according following inclusion criteria: (1) publication between January 1985 and March 2014, (2) availability as full text in English, (3) categorisation as original research, reviews, meta‐analyses or letters to the editor. Results A total of 69 articles were included in this review. It was found that poor communication can lead to various negative outcomes: discontinuity of care, compromise of patient safety, patient dissatisfaction and inefficient use of valuable resources, both in unnecessary investigations and physician worktime as well as economic consequences. Conclusion There is room for improvement of both content and timeliness of written communication. The delineation of ownership of the communication process should be clear. Peer review, process indicators and follow‐up tools are required to measure the impact of quality improvement initiatives. Communication between caregivers should feature more prominently in graduate and postgraduate training, to become engraved as an essential skill and quality characteristic of each caregiver.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Harms from discharge to primary care: mixed methods analysis of incident reports

            Background Discharge from hospital presents significant risks to patient safety, with up to one in five patients experiencing adverse events within 3 weeks of leaving hospital. Aim To describe the frequency and types of patient safety incidents associated with discharge from secondary to primary care, and commonly described contributory factors to identify recommendations for practice. Design and setting A mixed methods analysis of 598 patient safety incident reports in England and Wales related to ‘Discharge’ from the National Reporting and Learning System. Method Detailed data coding (with 20% double-coding), data summaries generated using descriptive statistical analysis, and thematic analysis of special-case sample of reports. Incident type, contributory factors, type, and level of harm were described, informing recommendations for future practice. Results A total of 598 eligible reports were analysed. The four main themes were: errors in discharge communication (n = 151; 54% causing harm); errors in referrals to community care (n = 136; 73% causing harm); errors in medication (n = 97; 87% causing harm); and lack of provision of care adjuncts such as dressings (n = 62; 94% causing harm). Common contributory factors were staff factors (not following referral protocols); and organisational factors (lack of clear guidelines or inefficient processes). Improvement opportunities include developing and testing electronic discharge methods with agreed minimum information requirements and unified referrals systems to community care providers; and promoting a safety culture with ‘safe discharge’ checklists, discharge coordinators, and family involvement. Conclusion Significant harm was evident due to deficits in the discharge process. Interventions in this area need to be evaluated and learning shared widely.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              La coordinación entre niveles asistenciales: una sistematización de sus instrumentos y medidas

              La mejora de la coordinación asistencial es una prioridad para muchos sistemas de salud y, especialmente, para la atención de problemas de salud crónicos en los que intervienen múltiples profesionales y servicios. La abundancia de estrategias y mecanismos de coordinación promovidos requiere una sistematización que ayude a utilizarlos de forma adecuada. El objetivo del artículo es analizar la coordinación asistencial y sus instrumentos, a partir de la teoría organizacional. Los mecanismos se pueden clasificar según el proceso básico utilizado para la coordinación de las actividades, programación o retroalimentación. La combinación óptima de mecanismos dependerá de 3 factores: grado de diferenciación de las actividades asistenciales, volumen y tipo de interdependencias y grado de incertidumbre. Históricamente, los servicios sanitarios han confiado la coordinación a la estandarización de las habilidades y, de manera más reciente, de los procesos mediante guías, mapas y planes. Su utilización resulta insuficiente para enfermedades crónicas en las que intervienen diversos profesionales con interdependencias recíprocas, variabilidad en la respuesta y un volumen de información procesada elevado. En este caso, son más efectivos los mecanismos basados en la retroalimentación, como grupos de trabajo, profesionales de enlace y sistemas de información vertical. La evaluación de la coordinación asistencial ha sido realizada hasta el momento de forma poco sistemática, mediante la utilización de indicadores de estructura, proceso y resultado. Las diversas estrategias e instrumentos se han aplicado, sobre todo, en los niveles sociosanitario y de salud mental; uno de los retos para la coordinación es extender y evaluar su uso a lo largo del continuo asistencial.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                gs
                Gaceta Sanitaria
                Gac Sanit
                Ediciones Doyma, S.L. (Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain )
                0213-9111
                August 2020
                : 34
                : 4
                : 340-349
                Affiliations
                [1] Barcelona orgnameConsorci de Salut i Social de Catalunya orgdiv1Grup de Recerca en Polítiques de Salut i Serveis Sanitaris (GRPSS) orgdiv2Servei d'Estudis i Prospectives en Polítiques de Salut Spain
                [5] Veracruz orgnameUniversidad Veracruzana orgdiv1Instituto de Salud Pública Mexico
                [3] Santiago de Chile Santiago de Chile orgnameUniversidad de Chile orgdiv1Escuela de Salud Pública Dr. Salvador Allende Gossens Chile
                [6] Montevideo orgnameUniversidad de la República orgdiv1Facultad de Enfermería Uruguay
                [4] Recife orgnameInstituto de Medicina Integral Prof. Fernando Figueira orgdiv1Grupo de Estudos de Gestão e Avaliação em Saúde Brasil
                [2] Bogotá Bogotá orgnameUniversidad del Rosario orgdiv1Escuela de Medicina y Ciencias de la Salud Colombia
                [7] Rosario Santa Fé orgnameUniversidad Nacional de Rosario Argentina
                Article
                S0213-91112020000400006 S0213-9111(20)03400400006
                10.1016/j.gaceta.2018.09.009
                30578041
                d5e3873f-6a7f-491f-a8b9-4fe16fd09462

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

                History
                : 17 July 2018
                : 23 September 2018
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 27, Pages: 10
                Product

                SciELO Spain

                Categories
                Originales

                Primary health care,Prestación integrada de atención de salud,Atención primaria de salud,Latinoamérica,Coordinación asistencial,Integrated health care,Clinical coordination,Latin America,Mecanismos de coordinación clínica,Clinical coordination mechanisms

                Comments

                Comment on this article