Barriers to implementing training strategies for the improvement of evidence-based practice competence of nurses in hospital practice environments still persist. The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of a specific training within the framework of the Best Practice Spotlight Organization® programme, on nurses' evidence-based practice competence and the practice environment in two hospitals. This is a observational cross-sectional study assessing evidence-based practice competence and perceptions of Practice Environments. The study sample were 204 nurses working at medical and surgical inpatient units at two hospitals involved in the Best Practice Spotlight Organization® programme. The study was conducted from February 2020 to May 2020. Three questionnaires were used to collect data: a sociodemographic/occupational questionnaire, a questionnaire exploring evidence-based practice skills, and a questionnaire exploring nurses' perceptions of their hospital practice environments. A total of 204 nurses participated. They were classified into two groups: those who had received specific training within the framework of the programme, called trained-champions (n = 66), and those who had not yet received training, control group (n = 138). The trained-champions exhibited better evidence-based practice competence values than the control group in all dimensions (p < 0.001), with a higher difference in means in the "Utilisation" dimension (-0.80; CI:-0.99,-0.60) and the "Knowledge" dimension (-0.63; CI:-0.88,-0.38). Trained-champions also had a more positive perception of the practice environments than the controls in all dimensions (p ≤ 0.001). The largest differences in means were in the "Participation" dimension (-0.48; CI:-0.66,-0.31) and in the "Leadership" dimension (-0.41; CI:-0.59,-0.23). Specific EBP training within the framework of the Best Practice Spotlight Organization® programme has succeeded in nurses (trained-champions) obtaining better EBP competence than others without this training. This could have contributed to increase nurses' abilities to integrate evidence into decision making in their clinical practice, while positively influencing them to perceive their PEs more favorably.

Background/objectives: Falls are the most common adverse events in hospitals. This study aimed to estimate excess hospitalisation costs attributable to inpatient falls, using Diagnosis-Related Group (DRG) relative weights as a proxy for resource consumption. Methods: Case–control study. Cases included patients who had sustained a fall during hospitalisation between 2020 and 2022 in 19 inpatient units. Controls were selected with matching technique based on age and admission period. Diagnosis-Related Groups and their resource consumption and cost estimators (relative weights) were provided by the Hospital’s Coding Unit. Results: A total of 613 falls were analysed against 623 controls. The Diagnosis-Related Group ‘Lower limb amputation except toes’ was associated with a fourfold higher risk of falling compared to others. Five more were identified in which the case group incurred significantly higher costs than the control group. These included three surgical Diagnosis-Related Group, ‘Urethral and transurethral procedures’, ‘Heart valve procedures without acute myocardial infarction or complex diagnosis’, and ‘Arterial procedures on the lower limb’, and two medical, ‘Heart failure’ and ‘Major pulmonary infections and inflammations’. Conclusions/Implications for practice: Identifying Diagnosis-Related Groups in which falls are associated with increased hospitalisation costs allows for a comprehensive assessment of the process, taking into account resource consumption and the clinical characteristics of hospitalised patients. These findings will enable nurses to develop targeted strategies to enhance the safety of hospitalised patients that contribute to the sustainability of the healthcare system.

Bacground/objetives: Falls are the most common adverse events in hospitals. The aim was to analyse Diagnosis-Related Groups and their associated relative weight as an esti-mator of resource consumption and costs in hospitalised patients who sustained a fall, compared with a control group of non-fallers, in order to identify the excess costs at-tributable to a fall. Methods: Case-control study. Cases included patients who had sus-tained a fall during hospitalisation between 2020-2022 in 19 inpatient units. Controls were selected with matching technique based on age and admission period. Diagno-sis-Related Groups and their resource consumption and cost estimators (relative weights) were provided by the Hospital’s Coding Unit. Results: A total of 613 falls were analysed against 623 controls. The Diagnosis-Related Group ‘Lower limb amputation except toes’ was associated with a fourfold higher risk of falling compared to others. Five more were identi-fied in which the case group incurred significantly higher costs than the control group. These included three surgical Diagnosis-Related Group, ’Urethral and transurethral proce-dures’, ‘Heart valve procedures without acute myocardial infarction or complex diagnosis, and ‘Arterial procedures on the lower limb’, and two medical, ’Heart failure’ and ‘Major pulmonary infections and inflammations’. Conclusions/Implications for practice. Identifying Diagno-sis-Related Groups in which falls are associated with increased hospitalisation costs al-lows for a comprehensive assessment of the process, taking into account resource con-sumption and the clinical characteristics of hospitalised patients. These findings will en-able nurses to develop targeted strategies to enhance the safety of hospitalised patients that contribute to the sustainability of the healthcare system.