A Comparison of Two Transport Monitor Systems With Regard to Efficiency and Staff Satisfaction in the Perioperative Setting.

anesthesia monitoring system patient safety perioperative post-anesthesia care unit

Journal

Cureus
ISSN: 2168-8184
Titre abrégé: Cureus
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101596737

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
May 2024
Historique:
accepted: 16 05 2024
medline: 17 6 2024
pubmed: 17 6 2024
entrez: 17 6 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Medical research aims to improve patient safety and efficiency in the perioperative setting. One critical aspect of patient safety is the intrahospital transfer of patients. Also, reliable monitoring of vital signs is crucial to support the medical staff. This study was conducted to assess two monitoring systems in terms of the handover time and staff satisfaction. To assess several aspects, two monitoring systems were compared: an organizational unit-related monitoring system that needs to be changed and brought back to the initial organizational unit after the patient transfer and a patient-specific monitoring system that accompanies the patient during the whole perioperative process. In total, 243 patients were included, and 375 transfers were examined to analyze economic factors, including differences in handover times and user-friendliness. To this end, 30 employees of the Heidelberg University Hospital were asked about their satisfaction with the two monitoring systems based on a systematic questionnaire. It could be shown that, especially during transfers from the operating theater to the intensive care unit or the recovery room, the time from arrival to fully centralized monitoring and the total handover time were significantly shorter with the patient-specific monitoring system (p < 0.001). Furthermore, the staff was more satisfied with the patient-specific monitor system in terms of flexibility, cleanability and usability. The increased employee satisfaction and significant time benefits during intrahospital transports may increase patient safety and efficiency of patient care, reduce employee workload, and reduce costs in the overall context of patient care.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Medical research aims to improve patient safety and efficiency in the perioperative setting. One critical aspect of patient safety is the intrahospital transfer of patients. Also, reliable monitoring of vital signs is crucial to support the medical staff. This study was conducted to assess two monitoring systems in terms of the handover time and staff satisfaction.
METHODS METHODS
To assess several aspects, two monitoring systems were compared: an organizational unit-related monitoring system that needs to be changed and brought back to the initial organizational unit after the patient transfer and a patient-specific monitoring system that accompanies the patient during the whole perioperative process.
RESULTS RESULTS
In total, 243 patients were included, and 375 transfers were examined to analyze economic factors, including differences in handover times and user-friendliness. To this end, 30 employees of the Heidelberg University Hospital were asked about their satisfaction with the two monitoring systems based on a systematic questionnaire. It could be shown that, especially during transfers from the operating theater to the intensive care unit or the recovery room, the time from arrival to fully centralized monitoring and the total handover time were significantly shorter with the patient-specific monitoring system (p < 0.001). Furthermore, the staff was more satisfied with the patient-specific monitor system in terms of flexibility, cleanability and usability.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
The increased employee satisfaction and significant time benefits during intrahospital transports may increase patient safety and efficiency of patient care, reduce employee workload, and reduce costs in the overall context of patient care.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38883109
doi: 10.7759/cureus.60481
pmc: PMC11180378
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e60481

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024, Tourelle et al.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Auteurs

Kevin M Tourelle (KM)

Department of Anesthesiology, Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, DEU.

Jonas Fricke (J)

Department of Anesthesiology, Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, DEU.

Manuel Feißt (M)

Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, DEU.

Maik von der Forst (M)

Department of Anesthesiology, Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, DEU.

Maximilian Dietrich (M)

Department of Anesthesiology, Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, DEU.

Daniel Gruneberg (D)

Department of Anesthesiology, Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, DEU.

Julia Sander (J)

Department of Anesthesiology, Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, DEU.

Philipp Schulz (P)

Department of Anesthesiology, Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, DEU.

Martin Loos (M)

Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, DEU.

Moritz S Bischoff (MS)

Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, DEU.

Lars Pursche (L)

Department of Urology, Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, DEU.

Markus A Weigand (MA)

Department of Anesthesiology, Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, DEU.

Felix C F Schmitt (FCF)

Department of Anesthesiology, Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, DEU.

Classifications MeSH