ABSTRACT
Background The precision of clinical documentation in trauma and orthopaedic surgery is pivotal, given its profound implications on patient care and medicolegal risks. This study assessed the impact of an autotext template intervention on the adherence of clinical documentation to the neurovascular assessment standards set by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma (BOAST). Methods Conducted at a single hospital, this observational study comprised two phases: a retrospective analysis of clinical documentation for 56 fracture patients (n=56) followed by the implementation of an autotext template and subsequent analysis of a new cohort of 57 patients (n=57). The intervention aimed to enhance documentation quality in line with NICE and BOAST guidelines. Results Initial findings revealed a prevalent use of the nonspecific term "NVI" (neurovascularly intact), with only 8.5% (n=5) of pre-intervention documents adhering to detailed motor function assessments and a mere 6.8% (n=4) recording limb colour. Post-intervention analysis showed a significant improvement, with 91.23% (n=52) of documents listing nerves (P < 0.001) and 96.49% (n=55) adhering to motor function documentation using the Medical Research Council (MRC) grading scale (P < 0.001). Despite these advancements, the study acknowledges potential limitations such as the Hawthorne effect and the ongoing challenge of staff rotations. Conclusion The autotext template intervention markedly enhanced the adherence to neurovascular assessment documentation standards, as evidenced by the substantial increases in detailed parameter reporting and supported by statistically significant P-values. This advancement highlights the necessity of equipping clinicians with practical tools to uphold high documentation standards amidst challenging clinical conditions. Future investigations should focus on the long-term sustainability of these improvements across varying medical staff cohorts.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: This study sought to assess the value of differing pre-operative measures in prediction of post-operative non-surgical site infection (NSSI) and length of hospital stay following hip fracture surgery. Methods: All patients admitted during a one year period with a hip fracture to our department were included in the study (n=207). Primary outcome measures were ten independent risk factors correlated to the development of non-surgical site infection following surgery for hip fracture. Secondary outcome measures were duration of hospital stay and inpatient mortality. Results: The patients who had severe cognitive impairment had a 71.0% risk of developing non-surgical site infection. Patients who had multiple medical co-morbidities also had increased risk of developing non-surgical site infection at 59.1%. Patients who developed NSSI on average stayed in hospital 13.1 days longer than patients who did not (31.6 vs. 18.5, p < .001). Conclusions: This study demonstrates the importance of reducing post-operative infection in hip fracture patients in view of reducing morbidity, mortality and cost. These patients can be stratified by risk factors and interventions can be employed in view of reducing inpatient post-operative infection rates in this cohort.