Improving Thoracic Surgery Ward Round Quality and Enhancing Patient Safety in a Referral Centre.
audit
note
patient safety
standardisation
ward round
Journal
Cureus
ISSN: 2168-8184
Titre abrégé: Cureus
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101596737
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2023
Aug 2023
Historique:
accepted:
31
07
2023
medline:
4
9
2023
pubmed:
4
9
2023
entrez:
4
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Introduction Ward rounds are vital clinical processes that facilitate an opportunity for daily review and management of thoracic surgery inpatients. The aim of this study was to compare thoracic surgery ward round documentation against locally agreed standards and design a template to improve the detail and uniformity of this process to enhance patient care. Materials and methods Data for this audit was collected retrospectively and prospectively. Data was collected during three auditing periods and managed on Microsoft Excel. Descriptive statistics were used for its analysis. Chi-square and Fisher's Exact tests were used to test for differences in reporting rates. Results and discussion Initially, a total of 199 ward round notes were reviewed. Imaging results (19%) and discharge planning (23%) were not reported. eCARE (electronic Clinical Assessment for Round Evaluation) was developed to ensure that all aspects of patient evaluation recommended by the guidelines were included. Reporting rates significantly improved after such changes. We analysed the effect of the new ward round note on discharge planning (23.3 vs 41%, p<0.001), complication rates (32.6 vs 21.9%, p=0.03), post-surgical length of stay (LOS) (7.0 vs 5.0, p<0.001). Conclusion Over a year, we audited the Thoracic Surgery Department's ward round documentation against locally agreed standards in line with national recommendations. Several important items were not regularly reported. Using closed-ended questions improved reporting rates, and patient care was optimised. Further research should explore the impact of this new documentation method on patient care and postoperative outcomes in our Trust as well as other cardiothoracic centres.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37664306
doi: 10.7759/cureus.42784
pmc: PMC10469692
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e42784Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023, Boyle et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
BMJ Open Qual. 2018 Apr 27;7(2):e000170
pubmed: 29719873
Clin Med (Lond). 2021 Mar;21(Suppl 2):17-18
pubmed: 34078680
BMJ Open Qual. 2022 May;11(Suppl 1):
pubmed: 35545273
J Eval Clin Pract. 2022 Jun;28(3):411-420
pubmed: 35220643
World J Surg. 2018 Apr;42(4):937-949
pubmed: 29067515
Ann Acad Med Singap. 2016 Apr;45(4):152-6
pubmed: 27292006
Future Healthc J. 2017 Jun;4(Suppl 2):s21
pubmed: 31098502
BMJ Qual Improv Rep. 2014 Nov 03;3(1):
pubmed: 26734307
Clin Med (Lond). 2015 Apr;15(2):135-8
pubmed: 25824064
BMJ Qual Improv Rep. 2015 Feb 11;4(1):
pubmed: 26734369
Emerg Med J. 2011 Sep;28(9):761-3
pubmed: 20817663
Clin Med (Lond). 2011 Feb;11(1):20-2
pubmed: 21404777
J Healthc Eng. 2021 Dec 15;2021:8105516
pubmed: 34956577
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011 Sep 15;184(6):680-6
pubmed: 21616996
Clin Teach. 2020 Jun;17(3):286-291
pubmed: 31452336
Ir J Med Sci. 2019 Aug;188(3):1071-1073
pubmed: 30426285
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2017 Mar;136(3):357-361
pubmed: 28087887
Ann Surg. 2014 Feb;259(2):222-6
pubmed: 24263319