重大创伤的处理:改善所需的改变。

J Dyas, P Ayres, M Airey, J Connelly
{"title":"重大创伤的处理:改善所需的改变。","authors":"J Dyas,&nbsp;P Ayres,&nbsp;M Airey,&nbsp;J Connelly","doi":"10.1136/qshc.8.2.78","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To describe the views of key healthcare professionals on the changes they considered to be important in the reduction of major trauma mortality between 1988 and 1995 in Leeds.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Qualitative unstructured interviews with a purposive sample of 10 healthcare professionals deemed to be key personnel by an experienced consultant who had provided acute trauma care throughout the relevant period. Each interview was tape recorded and transcribed; each transcript was analysed for important themes by two independent researchers who then discussed their results to resolve any differences in interpretation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three categories of change became evident: \"policy\", \"infrastructure\", and \"philosophy of care\". Each of these categories seemed to be equally important. Policy changes identified as important were the Royal College of Surgeons of England's report into trauma care (1988), the setting of standards for paramedic training, and the national audit of major trauma outcomes. Important infrastructure changes identified were training in advanced trauma life support, decreased ambulance response times, reorganisation towards \"consultant led\" hospital services, and an emphasis on quality monitoring. Changes in philosophy of care were increases in levels of teamwork, commitment, communication, and confidence. Together these facilitated an overall restructuring and refocusing of care.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>No individual change is seen as dominant for improved care, but rather a strategic mixture of facilitating national and regional policy guidance, organisational restructuring, and congruent professional attitudes were integral components leading to the observed changes. Improving outcomes in other areas is likely to involve an integrated series of changes which must be managed as a total system.</p>","PeriodicalId":20773,"journal":{"name":"Quality in health care : QHC","volume":"8 2","pages":"78-85"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/qshc.8.2.78","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Management of major trauma: changes required for improvement.\",\"authors\":\"J Dyas,&nbsp;P Ayres,&nbsp;M Airey,&nbsp;J Connelly\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/qshc.8.2.78\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To describe the views of key healthcare professionals on the changes they considered to be important in the reduction of major trauma mortality between 1988 and 1995 in Leeds.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Qualitative unstructured interviews with a purposive sample of 10 healthcare professionals deemed to be key personnel by an experienced consultant who had provided acute trauma care throughout the relevant period. Each interview was tape recorded and transcribed; each transcript was analysed for important themes by two independent researchers who then discussed their results to resolve any differences in interpretation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three categories of change became evident: \\\"policy\\\", \\\"infrastructure\\\", and \\\"philosophy of care\\\". Each of these categories seemed to be equally important. Policy changes identified as important were the Royal College of Surgeons of England's report into trauma care (1988), the setting of standards for paramedic training, and the national audit of major trauma outcomes. Important infrastructure changes identified were training in advanced trauma life support, decreased ambulance response times, reorganisation towards \\\"consultant led\\\" hospital services, and an emphasis on quality monitoring. Changes in philosophy of care were increases in levels of teamwork, commitment, communication, and confidence. Together these facilitated an overall restructuring and refocusing of care.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>No individual change is seen as dominant for improved care, but rather a strategic mixture of facilitating national and regional policy guidance, organisational restructuring, and congruent professional attitudes were integral components leading to the observed changes. Improving outcomes in other areas is likely to involve an integrated series of changes which must be managed as a total system.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20773,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quality in health care : QHC\",\"volume\":\"8 2\",\"pages\":\"78-85\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/qshc.8.2.78\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quality in health care : QHC\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.8.2.78\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality in health care : QHC","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.8.2.78","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

摘要

目的:描述主要医疗保健专业人员对1988年至1995年间在减少利兹重大创伤死亡率方面的重要变化的看法。方法:定性非结构化访谈,目的样本为10名医疗保健专业人员,由一名经验丰富的顾问认为是关键人员,他们在相关期间提供急性创伤护理。每次采访都有录音和文字记录;每一份记录都由两位独立的研究人员分析了重要的主题,然后讨论了他们的结果,以解决解释上的任何差异。结果:“政策”、“基础设施”和“护理理念”这三个方面的变化变得明显。这些类别似乎都同样重要。被认为重要的政策变化包括1988年英国皇家外科医学院创伤护理报告、护理人员培训标准的制定以及主要创伤结果的国家审计。确定的重要基础设施变化是高级创伤生命支持培训、缩短救护车反应时间、向"顾问领导"的医院服务重组,以及强调质量监测。护理理念的变化是团队合作、承诺、沟通和信心水平的提高。这些因素共同促进了护理工作的全面重组和重新聚焦。结论:没有个人的改变被认为是改善护理的主导因素,而是促进国家和地区政策指导、组织重组和一致的专业态度的战略混合是导致观察到的变化的组成部分。改善其他领域的成果可能涉及一系列必须作为一个整体系统加以管理的综合变革。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Management of major trauma: changes required for improvement.

Aims: To describe the views of key healthcare professionals on the changes they considered to be important in the reduction of major trauma mortality between 1988 and 1995 in Leeds.

Methods: Qualitative unstructured interviews with a purposive sample of 10 healthcare professionals deemed to be key personnel by an experienced consultant who had provided acute trauma care throughout the relevant period. Each interview was tape recorded and transcribed; each transcript was analysed for important themes by two independent researchers who then discussed their results to resolve any differences in interpretation.

Results: Three categories of change became evident: "policy", "infrastructure", and "philosophy of care". Each of these categories seemed to be equally important. Policy changes identified as important were the Royal College of Surgeons of England's report into trauma care (1988), the setting of standards for paramedic training, and the national audit of major trauma outcomes. Important infrastructure changes identified were training in advanced trauma life support, decreased ambulance response times, reorganisation towards "consultant led" hospital services, and an emphasis on quality monitoring. Changes in philosophy of care were increases in levels of teamwork, commitment, communication, and confidence. Together these facilitated an overall restructuring and refocusing of care.

Conclusions: No individual change is seen as dominant for improved care, but rather a strategic mixture of facilitating national and regional policy guidance, organisational restructuring, and congruent professional attitudes were integral components leading to the observed changes. Improving outcomes in other areas is likely to involve an integrated series of changes which must be managed as a total system.

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