Improving results management processes in an acute hospital using a multi-faceted approach.

BACKGROUND: Radiological examinations and laboratory tests are routinely ordered by hospital physicians as part of the care plan to diagnose and treat patients. However, the failure to actively review and follow-up on these results pose a significant problem to patient safety. A study team was formed to mitigate the clinical risks of poor results management, which was identified as a top clinical risk in our organization, in order to make improvements to the results management process and to ensure the timely review, acknowledgement and follow-up of test results. OBJECTIVE: This study was carried out to improve results management processes and ensure the timely review, acknowledgment, and follow-up of test results, in order to mitigate the clinical risks posed to patient safety. METHODS: The institutional expectations of results management were set and published as a hospital policy, which was communicated to all clinical departments for compliance. Improvements to the electronic medical records system were made to facilitate the results acknowledgement process, and physicians were engaged to educate them on the importance of results management. RESULTS: The study team observed a decrease in unacknowledged results from approximately 16 000 in March 2017 to 2673 in December 2020. The compliance rate for acknowledgement results increased from a monthly average of 83.7% (from March to December 2017) to a monthly average of 99.3% (in 2020). The risk score for results management decreased from 16 to 6.5 and was excluded from the organization's top clinical risks. CONCLUSION: This study showed the importance of both system improvements and culture changes that are required to improve the process of results management and provides a step forward for the hospital to safeguard patient safety and mitigate clinical risk.

Experience from a Multi-Disciplinary Team Against COVID-19: A Healthcare Perspective.

Globally, the capacity of healthcare systems across continents has been strained and put to the test with the emergence of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The timely need to ensure the availability of healthcare facilities to isolate and manage the surge in COVID-19 cases without overwhelming existing hospital capacity has posed challenges in many countries. In this paper, we discuss the conceptualisation, preparations and operationalisation of a community healthcare facility that was set up within a short time frame to attend to the convalescent needs of a large number of COVID-19 patients in the early phase of handling the pandemic. In the first month of operations, we monitored a total of 2129 clinical encounters, with the majority of patients between 17-35 years of age and between day 2 to day 6 of illness upon admission. Overall, there was a good outcome for the patients, with only 2.3% requiring transfer back to restructured hospitals. There was also no mortality. We hope that the sharing of our experiences of the challenges and learning lessons gleaned may be useful to guide individuals in planning for the future preparedness of healthcare systems in managing pandemics.

Survey of factors affecting health care workers' perception towards institutional and individual disaster preparedness.

INTRODUCTION: Health care institutions constantly must be prepared for disaster response. However, there are deficiencies in the current level of preparedness. The aim of this study was to investigate the factors affecting the perception of health care workers (HCWs) towards individual and institutional preparedness for a disaster. METHODS: A survey on disaster incident preparedness was conducted among doctors, nurses, and allied health workers over a period of two months in 2010. The survey investigated perceptions of disaster preparedness at the individual and institutional level. Responses were measured using a five-point Likert scale. The primary outcomes were factors affecting HCWs' perception of institution and individual preparedness. Secondary outcomes were the proportions of staff willing to participate and to place importance on disaster response training and their knowledge of access to such training. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. Logistic regression was performed to determine the factors that influenced the HCWs' perception of their individual and institutional readiness. Odd ratios (ORs) of such factors were reported with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Of 1700 HCWs, 1534 (90.2%) completed the survey. 75.3% (1155/1534) felt that the institution was ready for a disaster incident, but only 36.4% (558/1534) felt that they (as individuals) were prepared. Some important factors associated with a positive perception of institution preparedness were leadership preparedness (OR = 13.19; 95% CI, 9.93-17.51), peer preparedness (OR = 6.11; 95% CI, 4.27-8.73) and availability of training opportunities (OR = 4.76; 95% CI, 3.65-6.22). Some important factors associated with a positive perception of individual preparedness were prior experience in disaster response (OR = 2.80; 95% CI, 1.99-3.93), institution preparedness (OR = 3.71; 95% CI, 2.68-5.14), peer preparedness (OR = 3.49; 95% CI, 2.75-4.26), previous training in disaster response (OR = 3.48; 95% CI, 2.76-4.39) and family support (OR = 3.22; 95% CI, 2.54-4.07). Most (80.7%, 1238/1534) were willing to participate in future disaster incident response training, while 74.5% (1143/1534) felt that being able to respond to a disaster incident constitutes part of their professional competency. However, only 27.8% (426/1534) knew how to access these training opportunities. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that HCWs fare poorly in their perception of their individual preparedness. Important factors that might contribute to improving this perception at the individual and institution level have been identified. These factors could guide the review and implementation of future disaster incident response training in health care institutions.

Effects of survey mode on results of a patient satisfaction survey at the observation unit of an acute care hospital in Singapore.

INTRODUCTION: Over the years, surveys have become powerful tools for assessing a wide range of outcomes among patients. Healthcare managers and professionals now consider patient satisfaction as an outcome by itself. This study aims to determine if results of a patient satisfaction survey are affected by the manner by which the survey instrument is administered. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A patient satisfaction survey was conducted from May 2006 to October 2007 in a tertiary level acute care facility. All patients admitted to the observation unit during the study period were invited to participate. Using a contextualized version of the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Hospital Survey, data was collected through either a phone interview, face to face interview or self-administered questionnaire. Each of these survey modes was administered during 3 different phases within the study period. RESULTS: Eight hundred thirty-two (832) patients were included in the survey. Based on results of univariate analysis, out of the 18 questions, responses to 11 (61.1%) were related to survey mode. Face-to-face interview resulted in the greatest proportion of socially desirable responses (72.7%), while phone interview yielded the highest proportion of socially undesirable responses (63.3%). After controlling for possible confounders, logistic regression results showed that responses to 55.6% of the questions were affected by survey mode. Variations in response between phone interview and self-administered questionnaire accounted for 87.5% of the observed differences. CONCLUSIONS: Researchers must be aware that the choice of survey method has serious implications on results of patient satisfaction surveys.

Case of carbon monoxide poisoning after smoking shisha.

Carbon monoxide poisoning has been reported as a result of exposure to various sources of smoke, such as car exhaust fumes, home water heaters and tobacco smoke. We describe a case of symptomatic, moderately severe carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning in a young Mediterranean man after smoking a waterpipe, or shisha. This case highlights the importance of considering carbon monoxide exposure in patients presenting with non-specific neurological symptoms to the emergency department (ED).

Resuscitation for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: Singapore.

AIM: To evaluate characteristics and outcome of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients presenting to the Emergency Department (ED), and to examine factors that could be used to determine to prolong or abort resuscitation for these patients. METHOD: All OHCA patients presenting to the ED were studied over a three-month period from November 2001 through January 2002. Patient with traumatic cardiac arrest were excluded. Data were collected from the ambulance case records, ED resuscitation charts, and the ED Very High Frequency (VHF) radio case-log sheet. Information collected included the patient's demographic characteristics, timings (time from call to ambulance arrival on scene, time from arrival at scene to departure from scene, time from scene to arrival in the ED) recorded in the pre-hospital setting, the outcome of the resuscitation, and the final outcome for patients who survived ED resuscitation. RESULTS: Ninety-three non-traumatic patients with an OHCA were studied during the three-month period. Of the 93 patients, 15 (16.1%) survived ED resuscitation, and one survived to hospital discharge. There were no statistically significant differences for age, race, or gender with regards to the outcome of the resuscitation. The initial cardiac rhythms were asystole (65), pulseless electrical activity (21), and ventricular fibrillation (7). Fourteen (15%) received bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). All seven patients with return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) on arrival in the ED survived ED resuscitation. The ambulance took an average of 11.80 +/- 3.36 minutes for the survivors and 11.8 +/- 4.22 minutes for the non-survivors from the time of call to get to these patients. The average of the scene times was 12.5 +/- 4.61 minutes for the survivors and 12.0 +/- 4.02 minutes for the non-survivors. Transport time from the scene to the ED took an average of 39.1 +/- 8.32 minutes for the survivors and 37.2 +/- 9.00 minutes for the non-survivors. CONCLUSION: The survival rate for patients with OHCA after ED resuscitation is similar to the results from other studies. There is a need to increase the awareness and delivery of basic life support by public education. Automatic External Defibrillators (AED) should be available widely to ensure that the chance of early defibrillation is increased. Prolonged resuscitation efforts appear to be futile for OHCA patients if the time from cardiac arrest until arrival in the ED is > or = 30 minutes coupled with no ROSC, and if continuous asystole has been documented for > 10 minutes.