BACKGROUND: Once the World Health Oraganization (WHO) generic surgical checklist has been standardized and following the itinerary proposed, it is up to the different specialties to continue advancing in the improvement and adjustment of the checklists to their specific procedures.
METHODS: Through a Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) in which professionals from the surgical area of ​​the Torrecárdenas University Hospital, Jaén Hospital Complex and Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital participated, aspects that threaten patient safety in spine surgery and that are not included in the WHO generic surgical checklist were proposed. The authors scored each of the proposed items incrementally based on the degree of suitability. Based on the score obtained, they selected those who would be incorporated into the specific safety checklist.
RESULTS: A total of twenty-one candidate items were proposed to be part of the specific check list. These obtained scores between 15 and 11 points. After scoring them, it was decided to include the thirteen best rated in the definitive surgical checklist, seven of them in the initial phase, two in the phase prior to the incision and another four in the final part of the checklist prior to the completion of the procedure.
CONCLUSIONS: Professionals in the surgical area of ​​Neurosurgery can identify aspects not included in the generic checklist whose non-compliance can affect patient safety in spine surgery to at least the same extent as those included in WHO checklist. It is possible to propose a specific complementary checklist for spinal surgery, responsible for collecting aspects related to safety and success in these procedures.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of data about adverse events (AE) in intermediate and long-term care centers (ILCC). We aimed to synthesize the available scientific evidence on instruments used to identify and characterize AEs. We also aimed to describe the most common adverse events in ILCCs.
METHODS: A narrative systematic review of the literature was conducted according to Prisma recommendations. The PubMed database was searched for articles published between 2000 and 2021. Two reviewers independently screened and reviewed the studies through blind and independent review. We evaluated bias risk with Cochrane\'s risk of bias tool. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Discrepancies that were not resolved by discussion were discussed with a third reviewer. Descriptive data was extracted and qualitative content analysis was performed.
RESULTS: We found 2191 articles. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 272 papers were screened by title and abstract, and 66 studies were selected for full review. The instruments used to identify AEs were mostly tools to identify specific AEs or risks of AEs (94%), the remaining 6% were multidimensional. The most frequent categories detected medication-related AEs (n=26, 40%); falls (n=7, 11%); psychiatric AEs (6.9%); malnutrition (4.6%), and infections (4.6%). The studies that used multidimensional tools refer to frailty, dependency, or lack of energy as predictors of AEs. However, they do not take into account the importance of detecting AEs. We found 2-11 adverse drug events (ADE) per resident/month. We found a prevalence of falls (12.5%), delirium (9.6-89%), pain (68%), malnutrition (2-83%), and pressure ulcers (3-30%). Urinary tract infections, lower respiratory tract infections, skin and soft tissue infections, and gastroenteritis were the most common infections in this setting. Transitions between different care settings (from hospitals to ILCC and vice versa) expose AE risk.
CONCLUSIONS: There are many instruments to detect AEs in ILCC, and most have a specific approach. Adverse events affect a significant proportion of patients in ILCC, the nurse-sensitive outcomes, nosocomial infections, and adverse drug events are among the most common. The systematic review was registered with Prospero, ID: CRD42022348168.

BACKGROUND: The installation of an arterial line is one of the invasive procedures performed for hemodynamic monitoring and, even with its clear importance in intensive care, it is still an invasive procedure and liable to cause harms to the patients.
OBJECTIVE: To identify the adverse events associated with the use of arterial catheters in critically-ill patients in the world scientific production.
METHODS: The present scoping review was conducted according to the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist was used for reporting. The research question was \"Which adverse events related to the use of arterial catheters in patients admitted to intensive care are more evident in the literature?\". Data collection took place in the following databases: LILACS; MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL, EBSCOhost; and WEB OF SCIENCE.
RESULTS: Through the search strategies, 491 articles were found in the databases. After exclusion of duplicates, peer analysis of titles and abstracts, full reading and screening of lists of references, the final sample of studies included was 38 articles. The main harms cited by the publications were as follows: limb ischemia, thrombosis, hemorrhage, accidental removal, inadvertent connection of inadequate infusion solution, pseudoaneurysm and bloodstream infection.
CONCLUSIONS: It was evidenced that patients are subjected to risks of adverse events from the insertion moment to removal of the arterial catheter, focusing on the infusion solution used to fill the circuit, the type of securement and dressings chosen, as well as the Nursing care measures for the prevention of bloodstream infection.

BACKGROUND: Patient safety is paramount in providing quality healthcare and constitutes a global concern for healthcare systems. Radioiodine treatment to patients with well-differentiated thyroid cancer is not without risks. The aim of this study is to identify, evaluate and mitigate the risks associated with this procedure.
METHODS: A single-centre descriptive study was conducted in which risk management was carried out by establishing a risk map using FMEA methodology.
RESULTS: Based on the process map 6 sub-processes and 23 failure modes in the three phases of the treatment process were analysed. According to risk priority number (RPN), the sub-process with the highest risk was administrative management (RPN 82), followed by treatment per se and post-treatment imaging (both with RPN 70). An overall process RPN of 300 (156 pre-treatment, 74 treatment and 70 post-treatment) was obtained. Failures directly related to the patient pose a high risk. The implementation of verification systems, performing tasks earlier and providing quality medical information are the most relevant preventive measures to be implemented.
CONCLUSIONS: The application of the FMEA methodology in the risk management for radioiodine treatment is a valuable tool for improving the quality and safety of this process. The risk map has been able to identify failures at different stages, assess their causes and effects, prioritise the risks identified and implement preventive and corrective measures that can be monitored, ensuring the effectiveness of the actions taken.

OBJECTIVE: The incidence of falls in elderly patients in the hospital environment is three times higher than that in the community. The aim was to determine the characteristics of patients who suffered in-hospital falls and their complications.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study with patients older than 64 years of age, admitted between 2018 and 2020 to four clinics in Colombia who presented a fall during their stay. Clinical data, reasons for the fall, complications and use of drugs with a known risk for causing falls and with an anticholinergic load were reviewed.
RESULTS: A total of 249 patients were included. The mean age was 77.5 ± 7.4 years, and there was a predominance of males (63.9%). The patients were hospitalized mainly for community-acquired pneumonia (12.4%) and heart failure (10.4%). Falls occurred most frequently in hospitalization wards (77.1%) and emergency departments (20.9%). Falls were related to standing alone (34.4%) and on the way to the bathroom (28.9%), with 40.6% (n = 102) of falls resulting in trauma, especially to the head (27.7%); the incidence of fractures was low (3.2%). Ninety-two percent of patients had polypharmacy (≥5 drugs), 88.0% received psychotropic drugs, and 37.3% received drugs with an anticholinergic load ≥3 points.
CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized adults over 65 years of age suffered falls, mainly in hospitalization wards and emergency departments, especially during the process of solitary ambulation. Most had received psychotropic drugs and medications with a high anticholinergic load. These results suggest that it is necessary to improve risk prevention strategies for falls in this population.

OBJECTIVE: The main objective was to analyze unjustified discrepancies during the medication reconciliation process in patients admitted to the Hematology Service of our hospital and the pharmaceutical interventions. As a secondary objective, to detect possible points of the procedure to be perfected with a view to protocolizing the medication reconciliation process in hematological patients that adapts to the conditions of our center.
METHODS: Cross-sectional observational pilot study carried out in a reference hospital in hematology for a population of 800,000 inhabitants. Adult inpatients admitted to the Hematology Service between August and October 2022 whose medication had been reconciled were included. The main variables were: number and type of unjustified discrepancy, proposed pharmaceutical intervention, and acceptance rate.
RESULTS: 36 conciliation processes were analyzed, 34 admissions and 2 intrahospital transfer. 58.3% of the patients presented at least one unjustified discrepancy. 38 unjustified discrepancies were detected, with an acceptance of pharmaceutical interventions of 97.4%. The most common types of discrepancy were medication omission (56.8%) and drug interaction (24.3%). The most frequent pharmaceutical interventions were reintroducing medication (48.6%) and treatment discontinuation (16.2%). Polypharmacy and chemotherapy multiplied by 4 the probability of presenting drug interactions.
CONCLUSIONS: The most common unjustified discrepancies in the medication reconciliation process in hospitalized hematology patients are: Medication omission and drug interactions. The reintroduction of medication and suspension of the prescription are the most frequent accepted pharmaceutical interventions. Polypharmacy is related to an increase in unjustified discrepancies. The factors that promote the appearance of interactions are admissions to receive chemotherapy treatment and polypharmacy. The main point of improvement detected is the need to create a circuit that allows conciliation to be carried out on discharge. Medication reconciliation contribute to improving patient safety by reducing medication errors.

The human condition is linked to error in any activity that is performed, and the healthcare world is no exception. The origin of human error does not lie within the perversity of human nature, instead, it has its origins in latent failures in the healthcare environment and is a consequence of the processes and procedures applied. The science of the Human Factor deals with the application of knowledge to people (capabilities, characteristics and limitations), with the design and the management of the equipment they use and with the environments in which they work and the activities they carry out. Part of the Human Factor are the non-technical skills. These skills greatly influence people\'s behavior and, therefore, their performance and the quality of healthcare in a very complex socio-technical system.

Intensive Care Units (ICUs) have undergone enhancements in patient safety, and artificial intelligence (AI) emerges as a disruptive technology offering novel opportunities. While the published evidence is limited and presents methodological issues, certain areas show promise, such as decision support systems, detection of adverse events, and prescription error identification. The application of AI in safety may pursue predictive or diagnostic objectives. Implementing AI-based systems necessitates procedures to ensure secure assistance, addressing challenges including trust in such systems, biases, data quality, scalability, and ethical and confidentiality considerations. The development and application of AI demand thorough testing, encompassing retrospective data assessments, real-time validation with prospective cohorts, and efficacy demonstration in clinical trials. Algorithmic transparency and explainability are essential, with active involvement of clinical professionals being crucial in the implementation process.

This report describes how postoperative delirium in an elderly man during COVID-19 pandemic led to a serious event involving a central venous catheter. Delirium is a common cause of perioperative morbidity and mortality, and is characterised by an alteration in consciousness and perception and a reduced ability to focus, sustain or shift attention. The event was analysed by a multidisciplinary committee which developed a risk stratification delirium protocol in order to prevent similar events in the future.

BACKGROUND: Mechanical restraints are widely used in health care practice, despite the numerous ethical conflicts they raise. The aim of this study is to evaluate the ethical considerations contemplated in the current protocols on mechanical restraint in Spain.
METHODS: Systematic review in PubMed, WOS and Scopus, Google and Google Scholar. An ad hoc list of 30 items was used to evaluate the ethical content of the protocols. The quality of guidelines was assessed with AGREE II.
RESULTS: The need for informed consent (IC) is reflected in 72% of the documents, the IC model sheet is included in only 41% of them, the rest of the analyzed characteristics on IC are fulfilled in percentages between 6% (the document includes the need to reevaluate the indication for IC) and 31% (the document contemplates to whom it should be requested). More than 20 ethical contents are reflected in 31% of them and less than 10 in 19% of the guidelines. The quality of the guides, according to AGREE II, ranged from 27 to 116 points (maximum possible 161), with a mean score of 68.7. Only 9% of the documents were classified as high quality. Finally, the correlation between ethical content and quality measured with AGREE II was 0.75.
CONCLUSIONS: The variability of ethical contents in guidelines on mechanical restraints is very high. The ethical requirements to be included in protocols, consensus or Clinical Practice Guidelines should be defined.