Hola a tod@s, my dear friends!

Today I want to give diffusion to the Opinion article (sorry, you should practice your Spanish this time) published by José Manuel Velasco in Enfermería Docente in 2013 and broadcast entirely in Seguridad del paciente y enfermero (patient and nurse security)

I give a summary, but it’s worth that you read it whole.
“In an atmosphere of growing concern for the safety of health care, numerous studies have examined the relationship between nurse staffing and the results obtained.

Based on them, different Scientific Societies have spoken out about the health impact that produces a deficit in the relationship nurse/patient (n/p).

• Increase in iatrogenic complications.
• Increase in human errors.
• Delay in the weaning from mechanical ventilation.
• The rate of infection increased

Said in other ways:
 
•When the relationship nurse/patient (n/p) decreases, there is a considerable increase in times of critical processes as a result of the increase: increased medication errors, complications, wound infections, nosocomial infection.
 
•Patients who underwent surgery in hospitals with low ratios n/p are at a higher risk of developing complications avoidable as such as urinary tract infections, pneumonia, thrombosis, and pulmonary complications.
 
•Patients undergoing mechanical ventilation need more time for their weaning (disconnection of fan) when the n/p ratio decreases.
A large number of studies with large samples and published in high impact journals, alert in the same way about the consequences of inadequate planning of nursing staff and the relation between adverse events, death, costs and the number of nurses.
 
Based on these reports it can be asserted that a good qualitative and quantitative relationship of nurses reduces mortality and morbidity rates, also decreasing the stay average, the rate of readmission and consequently the costs of care.
 
Inexplicably, and immersed in an economic crisis that justifies everything, we have been observing daily significant reductions in allocations of professional nurses. Inexplicably I say because usually nobody is exposed to explain in details the reasons why these decisions were taken up before they run them. And because they are inexplicable from any point of view, both scientific, economic, and of common sense.
If in the absence of other arguments, there are exclusively economic reasons to justify that reduction and those decision-makers think that nursing staff reduction will save, it is a duty to launch an error and we must warning that, based on the extensive bibliography that documents this fact.
 
You may be eligible, at least, of”risky”the go ahead with proposals for reduction of staff of nurses under contrary to the recommended ratios”.
 
 
 
Who has ears to hear…
Happy Friday!
Gabi