社区医院急诊科居民主导的质量改进项目--无论人员配备水平如何,简化的 "计划-实施-研究-行动/患者安全 "质量改进项目的益处。

Spartan medical research journal Pub Date : 2024-09-09 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.51894/001c.123236
Martina Ghiardi, Shauncie Skidmore, Christina George, Rachael Crise, Olga J Santiago
{"title":"社区医院急诊科居民主导的质量改进项目--无论人员配备水平如何,简化的 \"计划-实施-研究-行动/患者安全 \"质量改进项目的益处。","authors":"Martina Ghiardi, Shauncie Skidmore, Christina George, Rachael Crise, Olga J Santiago","doi":"10.51894/001c.123236","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>An emergency department (ED) resident believed ED patients, who needed a simple laceration repair, would be better served if the ED used a laceration cart for supplies, as opposed to the hunt-and-gather method for collecting needed supplies. To address this issue, a two-step Plan-Do-Study-Act/Patient-Safety quality improvement (PDSA/PS QI) project was initiated, with the intent that the project could be completed in a timely manner regardless of staffing levels. The primary purpose of the project was two-fold: 1) to explore the possible time-to-repair benefits of using a laceration repair supply cart in the emergency department and 2) to determine the feasibility of conducting a simple multi-cycle PDSA/PS QI project in a potential staffing-shortage environment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective study using a simple 2-cycle PDSA/PS QI procedure was initiated. During cycle 1, baseline data, to determine the time to complete simple-laceration repairs using a hunt-and-gather supply process, was collected in the form of sign-out/return sheets located next to a laceration repair kit. Cycle 2 introduced the use of a simple-laceration supply cart in the ED, with data collected in the form of a sign-out/return sheet located on the supply cart. Data analysis included a two-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum (Mann-Whitney) test to assess the effectiveness of the suture cart implementation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Pre-intervention. Twelve valid cases were recorded on the sign-out/return sheets. The baseline time range to complete a simple laceration repair varied from 26 minutes to 151 minutes, with an average of 68.3 minutes (SD=40.8).Post-intervention. Twenty-nine valid cases were recorded on the revised sign-out/return sheet. The time to complete a simple laceration repair, using the supply cart, varied from 10 minutes to 116 minutes, with a mean of 36.9 minutes (SD=25.0), a statistically significant average decrease (p = 0.005) of 31.4 minutes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of a suture repair cart in the ED reduced the time required for physicians to perform a simple laceration repair. A minimal 2-cycle PDSA/PS QI process allowed residents and staff to participate in a quality-improvement project, even in a potential staffing-shortage environment.</p>","PeriodicalId":74853,"journal":{"name":"Spartan medical research journal","volume":"9 3","pages":"123236"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11389386/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Resident-Led Quality Improvement Project in a Community Based Hospital Emergency Department - The Benefits of Simplified Plan-Do-Study-Act/Patient-Safety Quality Improvement Projects Regardless of Staffing Levels.\",\"authors\":\"Martina Ghiardi, Shauncie Skidmore, Christina George, Rachael Crise, Olga J Santiago\",\"doi\":\"10.51894/001c.123236\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>An emergency department (ED) resident believed ED patients, who needed a simple laceration repair, would be better served if the ED used a laceration cart for supplies, as opposed to the hunt-and-gather method for collecting needed supplies. To address this issue, a two-step Plan-Do-Study-Act/Patient-Safety quality improvement (PDSA/PS QI) project was initiated, with the intent that the project could be completed in a timely manner regardless of staffing levels. The primary purpose of the project was two-fold: 1) to explore the possible time-to-repair benefits of using a laceration repair supply cart in the emergency department and 2) to determine the feasibility of conducting a simple multi-cycle PDSA/PS QI project in a potential staffing-shortage environment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective study using a simple 2-cycle PDSA/PS QI procedure was initiated. During cycle 1, baseline data, to determine the time to complete simple-laceration repairs using a hunt-and-gather supply process, was collected in the form of sign-out/return sheets located next to a laceration repair kit. Cycle 2 introduced the use of a simple-laceration supply cart in the ED, with data collected in the form of a sign-out/return sheet located on the supply cart. Data analysis included a two-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum (Mann-Whitney) test to assess the effectiveness of the suture cart implementation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Pre-intervention. Twelve valid cases were recorded on the sign-out/return sheets. The baseline time range to complete a simple laceration repair varied from 26 minutes to 151 minutes, with an average of 68.3 minutes (SD=40.8).Post-intervention. Twenty-nine valid cases were recorded on the revised sign-out/return sheet. The time to complete a simple laceration repair, using the supply cart, varied from 10 minutes to 116 minutes, with a mean of 36.9 minutes (SD=25.0), a statistically significant average decrease (p = 0.005) of 31.4 minutes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of a suture repair cart in the ED reduced the time required for physicians to perform a simple laceration repair. A minimal 2-cycle PDSA/PS QI process allowed residents and staff to participate in a quality-improvement project, even in a potential staffing-shortage environment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74853,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Spartan medical research journal\",\"volume\":\"9 3\",\"pages\":\"123236\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11389386/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Spartan medical research journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.51894/001c.123236\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spartan medical research journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51894/001c.123236","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:一名急诊科(ED)住院医师认为,如果急诊科使用裂伤推车来收集用品,而不是采用打猎收集的方法来收集所需用品,就能更好地为需要进行简单裂伤修复的急诊科病人提供服务。为了解决这个问题,我们启动了一个分为两个步骤的 "计划-实施-研究-行动/患者安全 "质量改进(PDSA/PS QI)项目,目的是无论人员配备情况如何,都能及时完成该项目。该项目的主要目的有两个:1)探索在急诊科使用裂伤修复供应车可能带来的修复时间上的优势;2)确定在可能出现人员短缺的环境中开展简单的多周期 PDSA/PS QI 项目的可行性:方法:采用简单的两周期 PDSA/PS QI 程序启动了一项前瞻性研究。在第 1 个周期中,基线数据是通过放置在裂伤修补工具包旁边的签出/返回表收集的,以确定使用 "猎取-收集 "供应流程完成简单裂伤修补的时间。周期 2 在急诊室引入了简单裂伤供应车,通过供应车上的签出/返回表收集数据。数据分析包括双样本 Wilcoxon 秩和(Mann-Whitney)检验,以评估缝合车的实施效果:干预前。签出/返回表上记录了 12 个有效病例。完成简单裂伤修补的基线时间从 26 分钟到 151 分钟不等,平均为 68.3 分钟(SD=40.8)。修订后的签出/返回表记录了 29 个有效病例。使用供应车完成简单裂伤修补的时间从 10 分钟到 116 分钟不等,平均为 36.9 分钟(SD=25.0),平均缩短了 31.4 分钟(P=0.005),具有显著的统计学意义:结论:在急诊室使用缝合修复车缩短了医生进行简单裂伤修复所需的时间。即使在可能出现人员短缺的情况下,一个最简单的两周期 PDSA/PS QI 流程也能让住院医师和员工参与到质量改进项目中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Resident-Led Quality Improvement Project in a Community Based Hospital Emergency Department - The Benefits of Simplified Plan-Do-Study-Act/Patient-Safety Quality Improvement Projects Regardless of Staffing Levels.

Introduction: An emergency department (ED) resident believed ED patients, who needed a simple laceration repair, would be better served if the ED used a laceration cart for supplies, as opposed to the hunt-and-gather method for collecting needed supplies. To address this issue, a two-step Plan-Do-Study-Act/Patient-Safety quality improvement (PDSA/PS QI) project was initiated, with the intent that the project could be completed in a timely manner regardless of staffing levels. The primary purpose of the project was two-fold: 1) to explore the possible time-to-repair benefits of using a laceration repair supply cart in the emergency department and 2) to determine the feasibility of conducting a simple multi-cycle PDSA/PS QI project in a potential staffing-shortage environment.

Methods: A prospective study using a simple 2-cycle PDSA/PS QI procedure was initiated. During cycle 1, baseline data, to determine the time to complete simple-laceration repairs using a hunt-and-gather supply process, was collected in the form of sign-out/return sheets located next to a laceration repair kit. Cycle 2 introduced the use of a simple-laceration supply cart in the ED, with data collected in the form of a sign-out/return sheet located on the supply cart. Data analysis included a two-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum (Mann-Whitney) test to assess the effectiveness of the suture cart implementation.

Results: Pre-intervention. Twelve valid cases were recorded on the sign-out/return sheets. The baseline time range to complete a simple laceration repair varied from 26 minutes to 151 minutes, with an average of 68.3 minutes (SD=40.8).Post-intervention. Twenty-nine valid cases were recorded on the revised sign-out/return sheet. The time to complete a simple laceration repair, using the supply cart, varied from 10 minutes to 116 minutes, with a mean of 36.9 minutes (SD=25.0), a statistically significant average decrease (p = 0.005) of 31.4 minutes.

Conclusion: The use of a suture repair cart in the ED reduced the time required for physicians to perform a simple laceration repair. A minimal 2-cycle PDSA/PS QI process allowed residents and staff to participate in a quality-improvement project, even in a potential staffing-shortage environment.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信