ArticleThe International journal of health planning and management2021
After Action Reviews of COVID-19 response: Case study of a large tertiary care hospital in Italy.
Article in The International journal of health planning and management, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- AFTER ACTION REVIEW AS A TOOL TO IMPROVE A TERTIARY HOSPITAL'S RESPONSE TO OUTBREAKS: EXPERIENCE FROM IRRUA SPECIALIST TEACHING HOSPITAL.Annals of Ibadan postgraduate medicine · 2024Article
- Organisational learning from the public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic: findings from a qualitative interview study.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Human resource management (HRM) strategies of medical staff during the COVID-19 pandemic.Heliyon · 2023Review
- After Action Reviews of COVID-19 response: Case study of a large tertiary care hospital in Italy.The International journal of health planning and management · 2021Article
- After-action reviews for emergency preparedness and response to infectious disease outbreaks.Western Pacific surveillance and response journal : WPSARArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAfter-Action Reviews (AARs) are management tools used to evaluate the response to public health emergencies at the national and subnational level. Aim of this study is to apply available AAR models to assess and critically appraise COVID-19 response of San Raffaele Scientific Institute, a large university hospital in Milan, Italy.
methodsWe designed an AAR based on the key-informant interview format, following the methodology proposed by the 2019 World Health Organization Guidance for AAR. After systematic assessment of the hospital reorganization, we conducted 36 semi-structured interviews to professionals with executive, clinical, technical and administrative roles. We designed an ad-hoc questionnaire exploring four areas: (i) staff management; (ii) logistics and supplies; (iii) COVID-19 diagnosis and clinical management; (iv) communication.
resultsOverall, the hospital response was evaluated as effective and sufficiently prompt. Participants stressed the relevance of: (i) strong governance and coordination; (ii) readiness and availability of healthcare personnel; (iii) definition of a model of care based on a multidisciplinary approach. Challenges were reported for communication management and staff training.
conclusionsThis study is one of the first applications of the AAR to the COVID-19 response in hospital settings, which can be successfully adapted or scaled up to other settings in order to implement preparedness strategies for future public health emergencies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.