UNASSIGNED: Despite many benefits offered by Health Information Technology (HIT) systems, new technology brings new and unforeseen risks to healthcare quality and patient safety if they\'re not properly planned, designed, implemented, and managed. This study examined health information technology-related (HIT) incidents to identify patient details-related issues, their association with contributing factors, and outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: Sources of information comprised retrospectively collected incident reports (n = 95) using two sampling methods, i.e., purposive and snowball sampling. The incident reports were analyzed using both the inductive method (thematic analysis) and the deductive approach using an existing framework, i.e., the International Classification for Patient Safety.
UNASSIGNED: The studies identified 90 incidents with 120 patient details-related issues-categorized as either information-related (48%) or documentation-related (52%) problems; around two-thirds of the 120 issues were characterized by human factors. Of the total sample, 87 contributing factors were identified, of which \"medical device/system\" (45%) and \"documentation\" (20%) were the most common contributing factors. Of 90 incidents, more than half (59%) comprised patient-related outcomes-patient inconvenience (47%) and patient harm (12%) and the remaining 41% (n = 37) included staff or organization-related outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: More than half of the incidents resulted in patient-related outcomes, namely patient inconvenience and patient harm, including disease risks, severe health deterioration, injury, and even patient death. Incidents associated with patient details can cause deleterious effects; therefore, characterizing them should be a routine part of clinical practice to improve the constantly changing healthcare system.

This article is part of the Research Topic \'Health Systems Recovery in the Context of COVID-19 and Protracted Conflict\' Liberia is one of the three countries worst hit by the 2014-2016 West Africa Ebola Virus disease (EVD) outbreak, during which it recorded over 10,000 cases, including health workers. Estimates suggest that the non-EVD morbidity and mortality resulting from the collapse of the health system exceeded the direct impact of EVD. Lessons from the outbreak were clear, not only for Liberia but also for the regional and global communities: that building health system resilience through an integrated approach is an investment in population health and wellbeing, as well as economic security and national development. It is therefore no surprise that Liberia made recovery and resilience a national priority from the time the outbreak waned in 2015. The recovery agenda provided the platform for stakeholders to work toward the restoration of the pre-outbreak baseline of health system functions while aiming to build a higher level of resilience, informed by lessons from the Ebola crises. Based on the co-authors\' experiences of on-the-ground country-support work, this study sought to provide an overview of the Liberia Health Service Resilience project (2018-2023) funded by KOICA, and propose a set of recommendations for national authorities and donors, derived from the authors\' perceptions of best practices and key challenges associated with the project. We used both quantitative and qualitative approaches to generate the data represented in this study by reviewing published and unpublished technical and operational documents, and datasets derived through situational and needs assessments and routine monitoring and evaluation activities. This project has contributed to the implementation of the Liberia Investment Plan for Building a Resilient Health System and the successful response to the COVID-19 outbreak in Liberia. Although limited in scope, the Health Service Resilience project has demonstrated that health system resilience could be operationalized by applying a catchment and integrated approach and encouraging multi-sectoral collaboration, partnership, local ownership, and promoting the Primary Health Care approach. Principles applied in this pilot could guide the operationalization of health system resilience efforts in other resource-limited settings similar to Liberia and beyond.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral areas are often overlooked in health-care research but they in fact deserve specific attention. Such areas struggle to maintain access to good quality health-care services due to their geographical context. At the same time, new interventions or promising innovations often emerge in places where creativity is urgently needed. In this paper, we explore this creativity at the margins in older persons care organizations in peripheral areas, which other healthcare providers and policymakers can learn from.
METHODS: This exploratory study is based on two large research projects on the quality of care for older persons in Norway and the Netherlands. We performed secondary analysis of interviews with quality managers and other quality workers and used additional document analysis and expert interviews to deepen our analysis.
RESULTS: The results show that older persons care organizations working in peripheral areas must deal with a number of challenges caused by their geographical context, e.g. geographical distances (between services and to the geographical center), workforce shortages, and landscape characteristics. We found that organizations use different strategies to tackle these challenges, such as scaling up, brightening up and opening up. These strategies, conceptualized as creativity at the margins, impact quality work in different ways, for example by enabling more person-centered care.
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that both policymakers and research should overcome their peripheral blindness by learning from and supporting creativity at the margins in future policies and research.

UNASSIGNED: To identify issues with the Swedish e-prescribing system and devise a set of recommendations to overcome the identified challenges.
UNASSIGNED: A number of health information technology-related incidents were collected retrospectively from various sources using purposive and snowball sampling. A search term containing five keywords was used to identify the electronic prescription-related incidents. The identified incidents (n = 24) were subjected to an existing framework, i.e., the Health Information Technology Classification System. Special attention was paid to the software-related issues, which were analysed using thematic analysis.
UNASSIGNED: Several types of software-related issues (n = 22) were identified: system configuration, interface with other software systems or components, software functionality, data storage and backup, record migration, software not accessible, and network/server down or slow. Both human and technical factors contributed to these incidents, including prescriptions not cancelled actively, drug handling errors, software programming errors, and system updates/upgrades. These software problems led to various consequences, such as incidents affecting multiple patients\' care management, delays in patient care, and risks of serious deterioration of health. Several temporary initiatives or administrative adjustments, for instance, cover letters to patients and local strategies, were used to overcome some of these challenges.
UNASSIGNED: This study provides insights into the challenges related to the e-prescribing system, contributing factors, consequences, and actions taken to mitigate those risks. Therefore, healthcare organisations using the e-prescribing system should adopt the provided recommendations to minimise the risks of design and developmental challenges, implementation and use-related issues, and the problems related to monitoring, evaluation, and optimisation.

Public reports on healthcare quality typically include complex data. To lower the cognitive burden of interpreting these data, some report designers create summary, or roll-up, measures combining multiple indicators of quality into one score. Little is known about how the availability of roll-ups affects clinician choice.
To determine how presenting quality scores at different levels of aggregation affects patients\' clinician choices.
We conducted a simulated clinician-choice experiment, randomizing participants to three versions of a public reporting website and comparing their clinician choices. One version aggregated all clinician-level quality measures into roll-ups, the second provided disaggregated (drill-down) scores only, and the third offered both roll-ups and drill-downs.
Five hundred fifty panelists drawn from a probability-based Internet panel.
We assessed the amount of effort participants exerted by tracking the length of time spent on the website and the number of concrete actions taken on the website (e.g., clicking items). We evaluated decision quality by measuring whether participants selected a clinician who performed more poorly than others and incongruence between participants\' stated preferences for dimensions of quality and their chosen clinician\'s performance on those dimensions.
Participants seeing drill-downs alone (mean = 14.9) or with roll-ups (mean = 19.2) took more actions than those who saw roll-ups alone (mean = 10.5) (ps < 0.05). However, participants seeing only drill-downs made poorer choices than those who saw roll-ups alone or with drill-downs. More participants seeing drill-downs chose a clinician who was outperformed (36.3% versus 23.4% [roll-up] and 25.6% [drill-down + roll-up], ps < 0.05) and made choices incongruent with stated preferences (51.2% versus 45.6% [roll-up] and 47.5% [drill-down + roll-up], ps < 0.05). The distinction between roll-up and drill-down was somewhat stronger for sicker participants.
Our results suggest that roll-ups in healthcare quality reports, alone or as a complement to drill-downs, can help patients make better decisions for themselves.

A novel fuzzy-based approach which combines ELECTRE III along with the Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA) is proposed in the present work to comparatively evaluate the service quality in the public healthcare context. Specifically, ELECTRE III is firstly considered to compare the service performance of examined hospitals in a noncompensatory manner. Afterwards, IPA is employed to support the service quality management to point out improvement needs and their priorities. The proposed approach also incorporates features of the Fuzzy Set Theory so as to address the possible uncertainty, subjectivity and vagueness of involved experts in evaluating the service quality. The model is applied to five major Sicilian public hospitals, and strengths and criticalities of the delivered service are finally highlighted and discussed. Although several approaches combining multi-criteria methods have already been proposed in the literature to evaluate the service performance in the healthcare field, to the best of the authors\' knowledge the present work represents the first attempt at comparing service performance of alternatives in a noncompensatory manner in the investigated context.

BACKGROUND: The evolution in the surgical and diagnostic procedures, the attention to women\'s preferences, the case mix, and differences in professional practices may lead to a variability in the quality of breast cancer clinical pathway. To catch and manage this variability it is important to use valid measures. The aim of this paper is to examine the concurrent validity of the breast-conserving surgery (BCS) indicator and to provide evidence to guide the quality improvement process.
METHODS: The BCS indicator was calculated using hospital discharge records (HDRs) and was validated against surgical registry (SR) data in a random sample of 336 women undergoing breast cancer surgery in 2012 in two Tuscan teaching hospitals. The concurrent validity of BCS was examined by cross-tabulating patients using the ICD-9 CM codes for breast surgery obtained from the two data sources.
RESULTS: The analysis, carried out involving breast cancer professionals, highlighted that the large majority of interventions coded as \"mastectomies\" in HDRs are in fact reconstructing procedures, including nipple-sparing, skin-sparing and skin-reducing mastectomies in SR. These results led us to refine the old algorithm, that calculates the proportion of breast-conserving surgery over the total number of breast interventions, and reclassify breast cancer surgical procedures into three categories: conservative, reconstructive and traditional mastectomy. Based on this new classification algorithm, the percentages of (I) reconstructive interventions were 16% at Florence TH and 38.3% at Pisa TH; (II) breast-conserving interventions were respectively 72.8 and 52.1%; and (III) mastectomies 11.2 and 9.6%. After adjusting for age in a logistic regression model, the percentages of reconstructive interventions at Florence and Pisa were respectively 22 and 34% and those of breast-conserving interventions 63 and 53%.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that breast cancer care indicators should be refined by distinguishing reconstructive procedures (nipple/skin-sparing surgery with implant or breast tissue expander insertion) from traditional mastectomy. The involvement of breast care professionals in the choice of indicators proved to be crucial to capture the up-to-date breast cancer surgical practice and inform the quality improvement process.

This paper aims to provide a description of the need for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services (CLAS) for Limited English Proficient (LEP) patients, an identification of how the lack of CLAS for LEP patients can compromise patient safety and healthcare quality, and discuss barriers to the provision of CLAS.