Background: Population-based studies from several countries have constantly shown excessively high rates of medication errors and avoidable deaths. An efficient medication error reporting system is the backbone of reliable practice and a measure of progress towards achieving safety. Improvement efforts and system changes of medication error reporting systems should be targeted towards reductions in the likelihood of injury to future patients. However, the aim of this review is to provide a summary of medication errors reporting culture, incidence reporting systems, creating effective reporting methods, analysis of medication error reports, and recommendations to improve medication errors reporting systems. Methods: Electronic databases (PubMed, Ovid, EBSCOhost, EMBASE, and ProQuest) were examined from 1 January 1998 to 30 June 2020. 180 articles were found and 60 papers were ultimately included in the review. Data were mined by two reviewers and verified by two other reviewers. The search yielded 684 articles, which were then reduced to 60 after the deletion of duplicates via vetting of titles, abstracts, and full-text papers. Results: Studies were principally from the United States of America and the United Kingdom. Limited studies were from Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Korea, Japan, Greece, France, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. Detection, measurement, and analysis of medication errors require an active rather than a passive approach. Efforts are needed to encourage medication error reporting, including involving staff in opportunities for improvement and the determination of root cause(s). The National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention taxonomy is a classification system to describe and analyze the details around individual medication error events. Conclusion: A successful medication error reporting program should be safe for the reporter, result in constructive and useful recommendations and effective changes while being inclusive of everyone and supported with required resources. Health organizations need to adopt an effectual reporting environment for the medication use process in order to advance into a sounder practice.

Background: Infection is one of the major threats to Healthcare Workers (HCW) worldwide. It exposes HCW to more than 20 kinds of blood-borne pathogen infections, especially the most severe cases, namely Hepatitis B Virus (HBV), Hepatitis C Virus (HCV), and Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV). The impact of infection about HCWs’ health, clinical burden, national economic burden, and humanistic burden suggests the importance of further investigation and discussion on this topic. Aims: This paper aimed to discuss literature on infection control knowledge and attitudes among HCWs and potential factors contributing to infection control. Method: For this narrative review Proquest, Medline, and Up To Date have been utilized to search articles about infection control knowledge and attitudes among healthcare workers and potential factors contributing to infection control. The search was narrowed to article between 2000 and 2018. A total of 400 materials were initially identified to be potentially relevant for the review. A total of 28 articles were included, and they were found to match the inclusion criteria. Results: Results from the reviewed studies showed that there was a high-level knowledge in terms of precautionary measures and compliance with needle safety precautions while staff attitude achieved above average. Weak positive correlation was found between staff attitude and precautionary measures, while moderate positive correlation was found between precautionary measures and compliance with needle safety precautions. Only precautionary measures were found to significantly influence compliance with needle safety precautions, in which higher precautionary measures, resulted in higher compliance with needle safety precautions.

Burnout is known to negatively impact healthcare providers both physically and mentally and is assessed using the Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Survey (MBI-HSS). Many versions of this tool have been developed for different parts of the world, but there is currently no valid version specifically designed for use in the Gulf Cooperation Council Region. This study aims to use data collected across six different regions in the Gulf Cooperation Council Region to assess the validity and reliability of the MBI-HSS model and develop a version of the MBI-HSS best suited for evaluating burnout levels among the healthcare providers in this region. The MBI-HSS questionnaire adapted by Maslach was distributed to 888 healthcare providers aged 32 years ± 7 years, 231 (26.1%) of whom were males and 651 (73.9%) of whom were females, between 2017 and 2018. The data collected were randomly divided into two subsamples, resulting in a sample with the data of 300 healthcare professionals for exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and 588 healthcare professionals for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The CFA of the original version of the MBI-HSS yielded a chi-square value of 1897 (p < 0.001), indicating the need for revision. EFA was then used to construct a new model of the MBI-HSS, and a CFA was performed on the second subsample to evaluate the model fit to the data. The EFA produced a 3-factor version that accounted for 56.3% of the total variance, with item 11 of the MBI moved to the Emotional Exhaustion (EE) subscale and item 16 loaded onto Depersonalisation (DP) instead of EE. Additionally, items 18 and 20 were omitted. The reconstructed version had a Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) value of 0.065 (0.90) and an adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI) value of 0.893 (>0.8). These results when compared to the CFA of the original model, which produced a GFI value of 0.79, an AGFI value of 0.74 and an RMSEA value of 0.09 (>0.08), indicate that this new version has a more satisfactory fit to the data and should be used when assessing burnout in the Gulf Cooperation Council Region.

Background: Burnout is defined as a long-term work stress. The prevalence of burnout syndrome among nurses is 42% of nurses in England. Many countries have conducted studies to measure the level of burnout among health care providers. There is a lack of research on burnout among healthcare providers in the Arabic countries. Aims: This study aimed to assess the burnout level among healthcare providers in Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates and to predict the burnout factors of healthcare providers working in tertiary private hospitals. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional survey was used to evaluate the burnout among healthcare providers. A total of 900 healthcare providers working in the clinical areas of six private hospitals in the Arabia Gulf Region were recruited for the study. A total of 892 healthcare providers were included in the study. A total of eight surveys were excluded due to major missing data. Results: A total of 892 healthcare providers were included in the study. The average age was 32 years ± 7 years for male and female healthcare providers. A high burnout level was found in the results. The participating female healthcare providers had a higher level of emotional exhaustion as compared with their male counterparts. Nurses had more emotional exhaustion as compared with physicians, respiratory therapists, and other colleagues. Conclusions: High burnout levels among healthcare providers can reflect negatively on the healthcare providers well-being, job satisfaction, and mental health. Burnout has been linked with medical errors and physician–patient relationships. We believe that it is important to deal with this issue of public health in Saudi Arabia and UAE. This study aimed to explore burnout levels among healthcare providers in Saudi Arabia and UAE. Results showed a high level of burnout among the healthcare.

Background: The outbreak of the novel Corona Virus Infectious Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread rapidly to many countries leading to thousands of deaths globally. The burden of this pandemic has affected the physical and mental health of the frontline health care workers (HCWs) who are exposed to high risk of infection and psychological stressors. Aims: The aim is to measure the level of depression among healthcare workers in Saudi Arabia during COVID-19 pandemic to establish interventional strategies. Method: A descriptive cross-sectional study was used to conduct the current study. The data of this study was recruited between 15 June and 15 July 2020 from healthcare providers who work in both public and private healthcare sectors in Riyadh and Eastern province in Saudi Arabia utilizing a self-administered questionnaire. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Dr. Sulaiman Al Habib Medical Group (IRB Log No. RC20.06.88-2). Data were collected by using The Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale SDS. A total of 900 healthcare providers working in the healthcare setting during COVID-19 pandemic were invited to participate in the study. A total of 650 healthcare providers participated in the study by completing and submitting the survey. Results: Almost 30% suffered from depression which can be divided into three categories; mild depression (26.2%), moderate/major (2.5%) and severe/extreme (0.8%). The finding shows that the level of depression among respondents at the age range of 31–40 years old was significantly higher than the level of depression among respondents with the age above 50 years old. Non-Saudi healthcare workers experienced more depression than Saudi workers. It also shows how nurses suffered from depression compared to their physician colleagues. Those who did not suffer from sleeping disorder perceived more depression as compared to those who are having sleeping disorder. Conclusion: It is recommended that health care facilities should implement strategies to reduce the prevalence of mental health problems among healthcare providers and eventually it will improve their performance in provision of safe and high-quality care for patients.