Background: Patients and physicians are considered primary customers of laboratory services. Therefore, assessing customer satisfaction with laboratory services is an essential indicator in improving the quality of laboratory services. Objectives: This study measures the level of satisfaction of physicians and patients who avail of the clinical laboratory and phlebotomy services, respectively, at the outpatient department (OPD) in King Abdullah Medical City (KAMC), to evaluate the possible issues and carry out corrective actions. Methods: A cross-sectional survey to evaluate the level of satisfaction using a modified patient and physician questionnaires, the patients were randomly selected and interviewed in phlebotomy areas at the outpatient and chemotherapy clinics. A paper-based questionnaires were distributed to all physicians all available physicians in KAMC who were regularly requiring laboratory investigations. The collected data were coded, entered, and checked for outliers or missing data and analyzed using the SPSS statistical package version 21. Results: A total of 435 patients were interviewed and their mean satisfaction was 4.51±0.32 out of 5. Respondents were satisfied with the Availability of laboratory tests. However, they were dissatisfied with Explanation of the phlebotomy cautions by the phlebotomist (75.4%). Twenty eight percent of physicians (132) participated, their mean satisfaction rate was 3.6±0.7 out of 5. The greatest satisfaction rate was related to critical results notification and the communication with laboratory personnel. Physicians were most dissatisfied with both specimen delivery process and incorrect test results. Conclusion: Both customers were satisfied with the laboratory service provided for them. Factors as "Explanation of the phlebotomy process by phlebotomist" and "specimen collection and delivery process" received lowest satisfaction score for patients and physicians respectively. Therefore, improving them is required to meet the needs of the customers and gain their satisfaction regarding the service.
CONTEXT: Several medical procedures are thought to increase the risk of transmission of infectious agents to health-care providers (HCPs) through an aerosol-generating mechanism. AIMS: Given the significant influenza and coronavirus pandemics that have occurred in the 20 th and 21 st century, including the current severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 global pandemic, the objective of this analysis is to assess the occurrence of disease transmission to HCPs from the performance aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs). SETTINGS AND DESIGN: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We performed a systematic meta-analysis looking at the odds ratio (OR) of AGP, causing infection among HCPs. We searched the following databases: MEDLINE (PubMed), ProQuest, Cochrane databases, and the Gray literature (ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform). In addition, we conducted nondatabase search activities. The search terms used were “MERS-CoV,” “COVID,” and “SARS” combined with “provider” or “healthcare provider.” STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: RevMan meta-analysis was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Following the search, we reviewed 880 studies, of which six studies were eligible. The estimated odd ratio utilizing a control group of HCPs who were exposed to AGP but did not develop the infection was 1.85 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.33, 2.57). The OR remained the same when we added another control group who, despite not being exposed to AGP, had developed the infection. The OR remained 1.85 (95% CI: 1.33, 2.55). However, there is an increase in the OR to 1.89 (95% CI: 1.38, 2.59) when we added HCPs who did not use adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) during the procedures to the total estimates. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of AGP with inadequate PPE can result in an increased risk of disease transmission to HCWs.
Background: The prevalence of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infection during the period of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains uncertain. Aims: This study aimed to provide an update on the epidemiology of MERS-CoV in Saudi Arabia from January 2019 to October 2020. Methods: Data on all laboratory-confirmed cases of MERS-CoV infection in Saudi Arabia from January 2019 to 20 October 2020 were retrieved from the Health Electronic Surveillance Network of the Ministry of Health of Saudi Arabia. Data collected were: demographic characteristics of cases, clinical course of the infection, related mortality and association with exposure to confirmed cases or camels. Results: In total, 299 cases of MERS-CoV infection were reported in the study period. The mean age of cases was 52.4 years. Most of the cases were males (78.9%) and had comorbidities (72.7%), and 11.9% of cases were health care providers. Of the 299 cases, 83 (27.7%) died. Older age and having comorbidities were associated with higher mortality. Exposure to camels was associated with lower mortality. Health care providers also had a lower mortality rate than non-health care providers. Compared with COVID-19, MERS-CoV infection still has a higher mortality rate but with a more predictable pattern and an anticipated deterioration. Conclusion: MERS-CoV infection remains a public health concern. The percentage of cases that were health care providers (11.9%) is lower than previously reported (19.1–25.0%), possibly due to the various preventive measures put in place to control COVID-19.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.