American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality
-
Health care systems have utilized various process redesign methodologies to improve care delivery. This article describes the creation of a novel process improvement methodology, Rapid Process Optimization (RPO). This system was used to redesign emergency care delivery within a large academic health care system, which resulted in a decrease: (1) door-to-physician time (Department A: 54 minutes pre vs 12 minutes 1 year post; Department B: 20 minutes pre vs 8 minutes 3 months post), (2) overall length of stay (Department A: 228 vs 184; Department B: 202 vs 192), (3) discharge length of stay (Department A: 216 vs 140; Department B: 179 vs 169), and (4) left without being seen rates (Department A: 5.5% vs 0.0%; Department B: 4.1% vs 0.5%) despite a 47% increased census at Department A (34 391 vs 50 691) and a 4% increase at Department B (8404 vs 8753). The novel RPO process improvement methodology can inform and guide successful care redesign.
-
Multiple health care organizations have identified handoffs as a source of clinical errors; however, few studies have linked handoff interventions to improved patient outcomes. This systematic review of English-language research articles, published January 2008 to May 2015 and focusing on shift-to-shift handoff interventions and patient outcomes, yielded 10 774 unique articles. Twenty-one articles met inclusion criteria, measuring each of the following: patient falls (n = 7), reportable events (n = 6), length of stay (n = 4), mortality (n = 4), code calls (n = 4), medication errors (n = 4), medical errors (n = 3), procedural complications (n = 2), pressure ulcers (n = 2), weekend discharges (n = 2), and nosocomial infections (n = 2). ⋯ Studies that reported funding had higher quality scores. It is difficult to identify trends in the handoff research because of simultaneous implementation of multiple interventions and heterogeneity of the interventions, outcomes measured, and settings. The authors call for increased handoff research funding, especially for studies that include patient outcome measures.
-
This study examines whether implementing a resident shift work schedule (RSWS) alone or combined with a hospitalist-led model system (HMS/RSWS) affects patient care outcomes or costs at a pediatric tertiary care teaching hospital. A retrospective sample compared pre- and postintervention groups for the most common primary discharge diagnoses, including asthma and cellulitis (RSWS intervention) and inflammatory bowel disease and diabetic ketoacidosis (HMS/RSWS intervention). Outcome variables included length of stay, number of subspecialty consultations, and hospitalization charges. ⋯ For the HMS/RSWS intervention, the preintervention (n = 98) and postintervention (n = 69) groups did not differ in demographics or length of stay. However, subspecialty consultations increased significantly during postintervention from 0.83 to 1.52 consults/hospitalization ( P < .01) without significantly increasing hospitalization charges. Neither the RSWS nor HMS/RSWS intervention affected patient care outcomes at a pediatric tertiary care teaching hospital.
-
The ambulatory care setting is an increasingly important component of the patient safety conversation. Inpatient safety is the primary focus of the vast majority of safety research and interventions, but the ambulatory setting is actually where most medical care is administered. ⋯ By providing a thorough examination of current practices, potential improvement strategies in ambulatory care health care settings can be suggested. A better understanding of the myriad factors that influence delivery of patient care will catalyze future health care system development and implementation in the ambulatory setting.
-
This study examined effects of scheduling errors on operating room efficiency and surgeon procedure heterogeneity on the rate of incorrectly scheduled cases. Operative cases in an academic center over 11 months were categorized as correctly or incorrectly scheduled. Surgeon heterogeneity was the number of unique procedures performed. ⋯ Highest heterogeneity surgeons had higher risk of incorrect scheduling compared with the lowest (odds ratio = 1.97, 95% confidence interval [1.34-2.98], P < .01). Scheduling errors led to delays in first starts, unexpectedly longer cases, and prolonged turnovers. Highest heterogeneity surgeons were at greatest risk for misbooking.