Objective To explore the traumatic situation and transfer methods of the in-patients injured in Lushan Earthquake, and to provide evidence for treating injured mass in future. Methods The information of the patients injured in Lushan Earthquake who were admitted in Chengdu Military General Hospital were collected by “No. 1 Military Medical Project” hospital information system and a self-edited “Questionnaire for Hospitalized Patients Injured in 4.20 Lushan Earthquake”. Results A total of 65 patients were admitted in this hospital: 63 (96.92%) patients were injured in the main shock; 28 (43.08%) patients were injured by building collapse; 23 (35.38%) patients got injured due to falls or got bruised when escaping; and 14 (21.54%) patients were accidentally injured. Rescue methods: 32 (49.23%) patients were saved by themselves; 23 (35.38%) patients were mutually helped; 10 (15.38%) patients were rescued by local non-military rescue team; 34 (52.31%) patients were rescued by military rescue teams; and 26 (44.83%) patients were transferred by air transport. Conclusion In order to cope with emergencies and major disasters (e.g. earthquake) and to treat injured mass scientifically in the future, we should set up emergency wards scientifically and reasonably, carry out education on earthquake prevention and disaster mitigation widely, reinforce self-care and mutual aid in the stricken area, quickly send rescue and medical teams, and organize training for air transportation of patients.
Objective To explore the factors which affect shared decision-making and develop strategies to get patients actively involved in clinical decision-making. Methods We conducted a survey on 566 patients of a Class A Hospital in Sichuan with group random sampling method. The data were collected by the use of anonymous selfadministered questionnaires. We used SPSS 10.0 to analyse the data. Results A total of 600 questionnaires were distributed at random, of which 565 were completed. There were 68% patients who had some knowledge of the disease, and 93% who were willing to participate in clinical decision-making. The patients’ biggest concerns were: treatment effect, cost and doctors’ skills. The biggest difficulties that patients worried about were: long-time waiting in out-patient departments and limited time to communicate with doctors. Conclusion As more and more patients would like to involve in shared decision-making, doctors need to provide patients with more choices and help them make a right decision in their treatment.
Objective To systematically evaluate effectiveness, dosage and adverse reaction of sufentanil versus fentanyl for postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA), so as to provide evidence for rational drug use in clinic. Methods Databases including The Cochrane Library, the special trials registered in the Cochrane anesthesia group, MEDLINE, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data were searched by the end of 2012, and the relevant periodicals were also manually searched to collect the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on sufentanil versus fentanyl for postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia. According to the Cochrane Handbook 5.0, literature was screened, data were extracted, and quality of the included studies was critically assessed. Then meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1 software. Results A total of 25 RCTs involving 1 944 patients were included. The results of meta-analyses showed that: a) as for visual analog scale (VAS), compared with the fentanyl group, the postoperative VAS at 2-hour, 4-hour, 8-hour, 12-hour, 24-hour and 48-hour was decreased in the sufentanil group; b) as for sedation scale, the fentanyl group, the postoperative sedation at 12-hour and 24-hour was lower in the sufentanil group when adopting 0 to 3 points scoring method, but there were no significant differences at other time points; c) as for drug dosage, compared with the fentanyl group, the postoperative drug consumption at 24-hour and 48-hour was less in the sufentanil group; d) as for adverse reaction, the incidence of postoperative nausea, vomiting, dizziness and somnolence in the sufentanil group was lower than those in the fentanyl group. But there was no significant difference in other adverse reactions such as skin itching, limbs numbness and motor disturbance between the two groups; and e) as for the demands of additional analgesic drugs, compared with the fentanyl group, the incidence of demanding additional analgesic drugs was lower in the sufentanil group. Conclusion Compared with fentanyl, sufentanil has better effects of analgesia and sedation for PCEA; Its dosage and incidence of adverse reactions are lower, so sufentanil is safer in clinic.
Objective To investigate baseline data of the current status of patients in China, and thus to develop strategies to get patients involved in evidence-based medicine (EBM). Method 300 questionnaires with 17 questions were distributed to the in-patients in West China Hospital, Sichuan University. Statistical software such as SPASS 10. 0 was applied to analyze all the data. Results No patients had ever heard of EBM. Most patients did not know much information about their diseases, but had a b desire to learn from their doctors. Most of them would like to be involved in the treatment decision-making and hoped that their doctors would care about their preference. The cost and the effectiveness of the treatment were the most important issues that patient concerned about. Conclusions The dissemination of health information is very limited for patients and the accessibility of effective health information depends much on the direct communication with their doctors. Promoting patient involved in EBM is fairly a hard and long way to go based on the actual reality of the country.
Objective To provide evidence for establishing a medical risk precaution and monitoring system in China by evidence-based evaluation of the medical risk monitoring and precaution system in Canada, including the current situation and corresponding prevention measures. Method According to the unified search strategy made by our research group, we searched relevant databases and official or government websites. We included articles about medical risk management, medical error and patient safety in Canada. The included articles were classified and the quality was ranked. Results A total of 15 articles were included, among which 10 were official documents (about 2/3) and 5 described research methods (about 1/3), mainly involving medical risk management or evaluation, medical error and patient safety. In 2002, Canada established its National Steering Committee on Patient Safety (NSCPS) and proposed the suggestions to integrate health care resources accross the country, build a patient safety system, and established the Canada Patient Safety Institution (CPSI) to improve patient safety. Canada revised the patient safety management system, collected and issued related information, strengthened doctor-patient communication, developed continuous education for medical staff, practiced the best medical behavior and model and improved lawsuit procedures. These activities have achieved great progress in practice. Conclusions What have been done in Canada will provide a guide for us to establish scientific patient safety system and promote public awareness of patient safety.
To attend the Patient Safety Summit of UK Presidency of the EU 2005, learn and share ideas with each other, participate in discussing and developing the vision and mission as well as goals for patients for patient safety program, seek the common interest for further cooperation so as to help promote the activities on patient safety in healthcare in China.
Participating in patients for patient safety program will help place patients at the center of efforts to improve patient safety. This paper presented a brief introduction to patients for patient safety program and its significance and functions.
Informing is an initiative behavior of medical staff in their clinical practice. Besides, informing is a key principle of informed consent. The number of cases of infringing upon patient’s informed consent is increasing because of the underestimate or ignorance of the obligation of informing. This paper discusses the concept, significance, content, and procedure of informing as well as the relationship between informed consent and informing.
Objective To learn and analyse the current clinicians’ knowledge and attitudes towards patient safety, and to provide relevant evidence for future medical education. Method We conducted a survey on clinicians mainly in West China Hospital of Sichuan University with group random sampling method. We analysed the data on the clinicians’ knowledge and attitudes with SPSS softerware. Result Totally 300 questionnaires were distributed, of which 258 were completed adequately. The results showed the clinicians’ knowledge on patient safety was poor, however, the respcnse from the clinicians in Outpatient Department were better than those in Inpatient Department. The majority of the clinicians (above 95.00%) were willing to learn the knowledge of patient safety. Conclusion As the clinicians are willing to learn the knowledge of patient safety positively, it is necessary to integrate patient safety education into the current medical education curriculum.