RESUMO
Introduction Supracondylar fractures are the most common elbow fractures in children. Their documentation and management must be done fully and correctly. This Quality Improvement Project (QIP) assessed the quality of documentation for paediatric supracondylar fractures admitted, in accordance with the British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma (BOAST). Methods We present a case series of supracondylar fractures presenting to a single UK-based district general hospital from January 2018 - October 2021. We performed a quality improvement intervention starting in November 2020. The retrospective data prior to intervention (January 2018-November 2020) were deemed "pre-intervention". Prospective "post-intervention" data were collected from April to October 2021. After "pre-intervention" data analysis, an intervention in the form of a documentation proforma was developed and multidisciplinary teaching sessions were delivered. Post-intervention prospective data collection followed from April - October 2021. Results There were 48 and 26 patients in cycles one and two, respectively. The mean age was 6.4 (SD 3.5) and 6.5 (SD 2.7) years, respectively; 42/48 in cycle one and all 26/26 in cycle two required operative management. The mean time to surgery was 1.3 and 0.96 days, respectively. Post-intervention, cycle two showed a reduction in patients with "no neurovascular documentation" pre-reduction (17% vs 12%) and an increase in patients documented as having "neurovascular status intact" (NVI) (44% vs 69%). In post-operative documentation, there was an improvement in documentation with 73% of patients having a post-operative neurovascular assessment documented, versus 50% in the pre-intervention cohort. Conclusion This QIP provided some early improvement in the documentation but with room for future progress as the project continues. It showed proformas can be an effective tool in implementing positive change. It also highlights the need for continuous clinical education across the multidisciplinary teams managing trauma.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Even though hip fracture care pathways have evolved, mortality rates have not improved during the last 20 years. This finding together with the increased frailty of hip fracture patients turned hip fractures into a major public health concern. The corresponding development of an indicator labyrinth for hip fractures and the ongoing practice variance in Europe call for a list of benchmarking indicators that allow for quality improvement initiatives for the rapid recovery of fragile hip fractures (RR-FHF). The purpose of this study was to identify quality indicators that assess the quality of in-hospital care for rapid recovery of fragile hip fracture (RR-FHF). METHODS: A literature search and guideline selection was conducted to identify recommendations for RR-FHF. Recommendations were categorized as potential structure, process, and outcome QIs and subdivided in-hospital care treatment topics. A list of structure and process recommendations that belongs to care treatment topics relevant for RR-FHF was used to facilitate extraction of recommendations during a 2-day consensus meeting with experts (n = 15) in hip fracture care across Europe. Participants were instructed to select 5 key recommendations relevant for RR-FHF for each part of the in-hospital care pathway: pre-, intra-, and postoperative care. RESULTS: In total, 37 potential QIs for RR-FHF were selected based on a methodology using the combination of high levels of evidence and expert opinion. The set consists of 14 process, 13 structure, and 10 outcome indicators that cover the whole perioperative process of fragile hip fracture care. CONCLUSION: We suggest the QIs for RR-FHF to be practice tested and adapted to allow for intra-hospital longitudinal follow-up of the quality of care and for inter-hospital and cross-country benchmarking and quality improvement initiatives.