José Joaquin Mira

Dr. José Joaquin Mira

1. Departamento de Psicología de la Salud, Universidad Miguel Hernández, 03202 Elche, Alicante, Spain
+1
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

40Years (1987-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
18 June 2019 in Journal of Medical Internet Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
Virtudes Pérez-JoverVirtudes Pérez-Jover
Virtudes Pérez-Jover
MSMarina Sala-González
Marina Sala-González
Mercedes Guilabert MoraMercedes Guilabert Mora
Mercedes Guilabert Mora
José Joaquin MiraJosé Joaquin Mira
José Joaquin Mira
Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet #Preprint #PeerReviewMe: Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint. Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn. Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period. Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author). Background: Between 20% and 50% of patients do not take their medication correctly, and this leads to increased morbidity and inefficacy of therapeutic approaches. Fostering treatment adherence is a priority objective for all health systems. The growth of mobile applications to facilitate therapeutic adherence has significantly grown in recent years. However, not all of them have evaluated the effectiveness for their purpose. Objective: To analyze whether mobile applications are perceived as useful for managing medication at home and if they actually contribute to increasing treatment adherence in patients. Methods: We carried out a systematic review of research published using the Scopus, Cochrane Library, Proquest and Medline databases and analyzed the information about their contribution to increasing therapeutic adherence and the perceived usefulness of mobile applications. This review examined studies published between 2000 and 2017. Results: Eleven studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Seven studies confirmed that the mobile application increased treatment adherence and in five of them the differences in adherence before and after the study were statistically significant. The users found mobile applications easy to use, useful for managing their medication. The patients were mostly satisfied with their use. Conclusions: The use of mobile applications helps increase treatment adherence and they are an appropriate method for managing medication at home.

4 April 2014 in Journal of Medical Internet Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
José Joaquin MiraJosé Joaquin Mira
José Joaquin Mira
INIsabel Navarro
Isabel Navarro
FBFederico Botella
Federico Botella
Fernando BorrásFernando Borrás
Fernando Borrás
RNRoberto Nuño-Solinís
Roberto Nuño-Solinís
NTNuria Toro
Nuria Toro
Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet

KVKris Vanhaecht
Kris Vanhaecht
DSDeborah Seys
Deborah Seys
SRSophia Russotto
Sophia Russotto
Reinhard StrametzReinhard Strametz
Reinhard Strametz
José Joaquin MiraJosé Joaquin Mira
José Joaquin Mira
Massimiliano PanellaMassimiliano Panella
Massimiliano Panella
The concept of second victims (SV) was introduced 20 years ago to draw attention to healthcare professionals involved in patient safety incidents. The objective of this paper is to advance the theoretical conceptualization and to develop a common definition. A literature search was performed in Medline, EMBASE and CINAHL (October 2010 to November 2020). The description of SV was extracted regarding three concepts: (1) involved persons, (2) content of action and (3) impact. Based on these concepts, a definition was proposed and discussed within the ERNST-COST consortium in 2021 and 2022. An international group of experts finalized the definition. In total, 83 publications were reviewed. Based on expert consensus, a second victim was defined as: “Any health care worker, directly or indirectly involved in an unanticipated adverse patient event, unintentional healthcare error, or patient injury and who becomes victimized in the sense that they are also negatively impacted”. The proposed definition can be used to help to reduce the impact of incidents on both healthcare professionals and organizations, thereby indirectly improve healthcare quality, patient safety, person-centeredness and human resource management.

9 April 2015 in BMC Health Services Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
OVon behalf of the Research Group on Second and Third Victims
on behalf of the Research Group on Second and Third Victims
José Joaquin MiraJosé Joaquin Mira
José Joaquin Mira
Irene Carrillo MurciaIrene Carrillo Murcia
Irene Carrillo Murcia
Susana LorenzoSusana Lorenzo
Susana Lorenzo
LFLena Ferrús
Lena Ferrús
Maria-Pilar Astier-PeñaMaria-Pilar Astier-Peña
Maria-Pilar Astier-Peña
Adverse events (AEs) cause harm in patients and disturbance for the professionals involved in the event (second victims). This study assessed the impact of AEs in primary care (PC) and hospitals in Spain on second victims. A cross-sectional study was conducted. We carried out a survey based on a random sample of doctors and nurses from PC and hospital settings in Spain. A total of 1087 health professionals responded, 610 from PC and 477 from hospitals. A total of 430 health professionals (39.6%) had informed a patient of an error. Reporting to patients was carried out by those with the strongest safety culture (Odds Ratio –OR- 1.1, 95% Confidence Interval –CI- 1.0-1.2), nurses (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.5-2.3), those under 50 years of age (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.6-0.9) and primary care staff (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.5-0.9). A total of 381 (62.5%, 95% CI 59-66%) and 346 (72.5%, IC95% 69-77%) primary care and hospital health professionals, respectively, reported having gone through the second-victim experience, either directly or through a colleague, in the previous 5 years. The emotional responses were: feelings of guilt (521, 58.8%), anxiety (426, 49.6%), re-living the event (360, 42.2%), tiredness (341, 39.4%), insomnia (317, 38.0%) and persistent feelings of insecurity (284, 32.8%). In doctors, the most common responses were: feelings of guilt (OR 0.7 IC95% 0.6-0.8), re-living the event (OR 0.7, IC95% o.6-0.8), and anxiety (OR 0.8, IC95% 0.6-0.9), while nurses showed greater solidarity in terms of supporting the second victim, in both PC (p = 0.019) and hospital (p = 0.019) settings. Adverse events cause guilt, anxiety, and loss of confidence in health professionals. Most are involved in such events as second victims at least once in their careers. They rarely receive any training or education on coping strategies for this phenomenon.

16 March 2015 in Expert Opinion on Drug Safety
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
José Joaquin MiraJosé Joaquin Mira
José Joaquin Mira
Susana LorenzoSusana Lorenzo
Susana Lorenzo
Mercedes Guilabert MoraMercedes Guilabert Mora
Mercedes Guilabert Mora
Isabel NavarroIsabel Navarro
Isabel Navarro
Virtudes Pérez-JoverVirtudes Pérez-Jover
Virtudes Pérez-Jover
Medication errors have been analyzed as a health professionals' responsibility (due to mistakes in prescription, preparation or dispensing). However, sometimes, patients themselves (or their caregivers) make mistakes in the administration of the medication. The epidemiology of patient medication errors (PEs) has been scarcely reviewed in spite of its impact on people, on therapeutic effectiveness and on incremental cost for the health systems. This study reviews and describes the methodological approaches and results of published studies on the frequency, causes and consequences of medication errors committed by patients at home. A review of research articles published between 1990 and 2014 was carried out using MEDLINE, Web-of-Knowledge, Scopus, Tripdatabase and Index Medicus. The frequency of PE was situated between 19 and 59%. The elderly and the preschooler population constituted a higher number of mistakes than others. The most common were: incorrect dosage, forgetting, mixing up medications, failing to recall indications and taking out-of-date or inappropriately stored drugs. The majority of these mistakes have no negative consequences. Health literacy, information and communication and complexity of use of dispensing devices were identified as causes of PEs. Apps and other new technologies offer several opportunities for improving drug safety.

24 November 2011 in European Journal of Public Health
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JAJesús María Aranaz-Andrés
Jesús María Aranaz-Andrés
CACarlos Aibar
Carlos Aibar
RLRamón Limón
Ramón Limón
José Joaquin MiraJosé Joaquin Mira
José Joaquin Mira
JVJulián Vitaller
Julián Vitaller
ETEnrique Terol
Enrique Terol
Background: Healthcare practices involve risks for patients, but there has been little research to date on the occurrence of adverse events (AE) in primary care (PC). The frequency of AE in PC in Spain, the factors that contribute to their occurrence, their severity and their preventability, were analysed. Methods: Observational cross-sectional study was carried out in 48 PC centres in 16 regions of Spain. PC professionals were asked to assess whether the AE was caused by the healthcare or if it was an expectable consequence of the patient's underlying condition. A total of 452 healthcare professionals who attended 96 047 consultations were involved. Results: A total of 773 AE were identified, so that the point prevalence of AE was 0.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76–0.85]. A majority of AE (64.3%) were considered preventable and only 5.9% were severe, usually related to medication [odds ratio (OR) = 4.6; 95% CI 2.1–10.3]. The most frequent causal factor of the AE was associated with medication (adverse drug reactions and medication errors), but problems in communication and management were at the root of many of the AE. Nurses reported more preventable AE (OR = 1.9; 95% CI 1.2–2.8). Conclusion: In spite of an AE being less damaging in PC, large numbers of patients and professionals suffer their consequences each year. An awareness of the magnitude and impact of AE is the first step on the road to the cultural change necessary for achieving safer healthcare.