Dataset Information

Measurement of attacks and interferences with health care in conflict: validation of an incident reporting tool for attacks on and interferences with health care in eastern Burma.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Attacks on health care in armed conflict and other civil disturbances, including those on health workers, health facilities, patients and health transports, represent a critical yet often overlooked violation of human rights and international humanitarian law. Reporting has been limited yet local health workers working on the frontline in conflict are often the victims of chronic abuse and interferences with their care-giving. This paper reports on the validation and revision of an instrument designed to capture incidents via a qualitative and quantitative evaluation method.

Methods

Based on previous research and interviews with experts, investigators developed a 33-question instrument to report on attacks on healthcare. These items would provide information about who, what, where, when, and the impact of each incident of attack on or interference with health. The questions are grouped into 4 domains: health facilities, health workers, patients, and health transports. 38 health workers who work in eastern Burma participated in detailed discussion groups in August 2013 to review the face and content validity of the instrument and then tested the instrument based on two simulated scenarios. Completed forms were graded to test the inter-rater reliability of the instrument.

Results

Face and content validity were confirmed with participants expressing that the instrument would assist in better reporting of attacks on health in the setting of eastern Burma where they work. Participants were able to give an accurate account of relevant incidents (86% and 82% on Scenarios 1 and 2 respectively). Item-by-item review of the instrument revealed that greater than 95% of participants completed the correct sections. Errors primarily occurred in quantifying the impact of the incident on patient care. Revisions to the translated instrument based on the results consisted primarily of design improvements and simplification of some numerical fields.

Conclusion

This instrument was validated for use in eastern Burma and could be used as a model for reporting violence towards health care in other conflict settings.

SUBMITTER: Haar RJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4232629 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Measurement of attacks and interferences with health care in conflict: validation of an incident reporting tool for attacks on and interferences with health care in eastern Burma.

Haar Rohini J RJ Footer Katherine Ha KH Singh Sonal S Sherman Susan G SG Branchini Casey C Sclar Joshua J Clouse Emily E Rubenstein Leonard S LS

Conflict and health 20141103 1

<h4>Background</h4>Attacks on health care in armed conflict and other civil disturbances, including those on health workers, health facilities, patients and health transports, represent a critical yet often overlooked violation of human rights and international humanitarian law. Reporting has been limited yet local health workers working on the frontline in conflict are often the victims of chronic abuse and interferences with their care-giving. This paper reports on the validation and revision ...[more]

PMID: 25400693

Similar Datasets

Project description:The use of mobile and wireless digital technologies - mobile health (mhealth)- is increasingly been adopted in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to improve data visibility, improve decision-making, and consequently help ensure availability of health commodities in health facilities. In a bid to improve availability of medicines in primary health care facilities, the South African department of Health launched the Stock Visibility Solution (SVS), a mobile application developed for the purpose of capturing and monitoring stock levels of medicines including vaccines using mobile phones. The stock levels of medicines in facilities are usually uploaded to the central stock management system so that managers can act promptly to address stock-out situations. Pilot studies show that the SVS has the potential to reduce stock-outs from occurring. This study aimed to explore the perceptions and experiences of the SVS system amongst healthcare workers (HCWs) who are involved with managing stock levels of medicines in primary health care facilities in the Eastern Cape Province. This will help identify potential barriers and facilitators to implementation of the system and contribute to the development of strategies to improve its efficiency and effectiveness. A qualitative research design was employed, including semi-structured interviews with 64 HCWs working in primary health care facilities in the OR Tambo district, Eastern Cape Province in South Africa. Data was transcribed verbatim and analyzed using thematic analysis. Most HCWs understood the SVS as a system for reporting stock levels to managers and conveyed commitment to ensuring the system works. However, they highlighted a number of factors that demotivated efficient usage of the system: inadequate training, staff shortages and high staff turnover, lack of responses from the managers, the extra workload that comes with the system, amongst others. HCWs made various suggestions for how the system might be improved, most pertinently the need for more pharmacists and pharmacy assistants and for these cadres to be primarily in-charge of stock management and the use of the SVS. While HCWs are committed to addressing vaccine stock-outs, they face various barriers to an effective and efficient implementation of the SVS system. We make various recommendations for how these barriers might be addressed.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Health care workers (HCWs) are essential for the delivery of health care services in conflict areas and in rebuilding health systems post-conflict. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to systematically identify and map the published evidence on HCWs in conflict and post-conflict settings. Our ultimate aim is to inform researchers and funders on research gap on this subject and support relevant stakeholders by providing them with a comprehensive resource of evidence about HCWs in conflict and post-conflict settings on a global scale. METHODS:We conducted a systematic mapping of the literature. We included a wide range of study designs, addressing any type of personnel providing health services in either conflict or post-conflict settings. We conducted a descriptive analysis of the general characteristics of the included papers and built two interactive systematic maps organized by country, study design and theme. RESULTS:Out of 13,863 identified citations, we included a total of 474 studies: 304 on conflict settings, 149 on post-conflict settings, and 21 on both conflict and post-conflict settings. For conflict settings, the most studied counties were Iraq (15%), Syria (15%), Israel (10%), and the State of Palestine (9%). The most common types of publication were opinion pieces in conflict settings (39%), and primary studies (33%) in post-conflict settings. In addition, most of the first and corresponding authors were affiliated with countries different from the country focus of the paper. Violence against health workers was the most tackled theme of papers reporting on conflict settings, while workforce performance was the most addressed theme by papers reporting on post-conflict settings. The majority of papers in both conflict and post-conflict settings did not report funding sources (81% and 53%) or conflicts of interest of authors (73% and 62%), and around half of primary studies did not report on ethical approvals (45% and 41%). CONCLUSIONS:This systematic mapping provides a comprehensive database of evidence about HCWs in conflict and post-conflict settings on a global scale that is often needed to inform policies and strategies on effective workforce planning and management and in reducing emigration. It can also be used to identify evidence for policy-relevant questions, knowledge gaps to direct future primary research, and knowledge clusters.

Project description:ImportanceCybersecurity is an increasingly important threat to health care delivery, and email phishing is a major attack vector against hospital employees.ObjectiveTo describe the practice of phishing simulation and the extent to which health care employees are vulnerable to phishing simulations.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective, multicenter quality improvement study of a convenience sample of 6 geographically dispersed US health care institutions that ran phishing simulations from August 1, 2011, through April 10, 2018. The specific institutions are anonymized herein for security and privacy concerns.ExposuresSimulated phishing emails received by employees at US health care institutions.Main outcomes and measuresDate of phishing campaign, campaign number, number of emails sent, number of emails clicked, and email content. Emails were classified into 3 categories (office related, personal, or information technology related).ResultsThe final study sample included 6 anonymized US health care institutions, 95 simulated phishing campaigns, and 2 971 945 emails, 422 062 of which were clicked (14.2%). The median institutional click rates for campaigns ranged from 7.4% (interquartile range [IQR], 5.8%-9.6%) to 30.7% (IQR, 25.2%-34.4%), with an overall median click rate of 16.7% (IQR, 8.3%-24.2%) across all campaigns and institutions. In the regression model, repeated phishing campaigns were associated with decreased odds of clicking on a subsequent phishing email (adjusted OR, 0.511; 95% CI, 0.382-0.685 for 6-10 campaigns; adjusted OR, 0.335; 95% CI, 0.282-0.398 for >10 campaigns).Conclusions and relevanceAmong a sample of US health care institutions that sent phishing simulations, almost 1 in 7 simulated emails sent were clicked on by employees. Increasing campaigns were associated with decreased odds of clicking on a phishing email, suggesting a potential benefit of phishing simulation and awareness. With cyberattacks increasing against US health care systems, these click rates represent a major cybersecurity risk for hospitals.

Project description:BackgroundThe study objectives were to describe the incidence and the nature of patient safety incidents (PSIs) in primary care general practice settings, and to explore the association between these incidents and practice or organizational characteristics.MethodsGPs, randomly selected from a national influenza surveillance network (n = 800) across France, prospectively reported any incidents observed each day over a one-week period between May and July 2013. An incident was an event or circumstance that could have resulted, or did result, in harm to a patient, which the GP would not wish to recur. Primary outcome was the incidence of PSIs which was determined by counting reports per total number of patient encounters. Reports were categorized using existing taxonomies. The association with practice and organizational characteristics was calculated using a negative binomial regression model.Results127 GPs (participation rate 79%) reported 317 incidents of which 270 were deemed to be a posteriori judged preventable, among 12,348 encounters. 77% had no consequences for the patient. The incidence of reported PSIs was 26 per 1000 patient encounters per week (95% CI [23‰ -28‰]). Incidents were three times more frequently related to the organization of healthcare than to knowledge and skills of health professionals, and especially to the workflow in the GPs' offices and to the communication between providers and with patients. Among GP characteristics, three were related with an increased incidence in the final multivariable model: length of consultation higher than 15 minutes, method of receiving radiological results (by fax compared to paper or email), and being in a multidisciplinary clinic compared with sole practitioners.ConclusionsPatient safety incidents (PSIs) occurred in mean once every two days in the sampled GPs and 2% of them were associated with a definite possibility for harm. Studying the association between organizational features of general practices and PSIs remains a major challenge and one of the most important issues for safety in primary care.

Dataset Information

Measurement of attacks and interferences with health care in conflict: validation of an incident reporting tool for attacks on and interferences with health care in eastern Burma.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Measurement of attacks and interferences with health care in conflict: validation of an incident reporting tool for attacks on and interferences with health care in eastern Burma.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets