Changing the liver transplant assessment process from inpatient to a day-case and outpatient approach to reduce inpatient bed utlisation.

The liver transplant assessment process involves a complex set of tests and clinical reviews to determine suitability for liver transplantation. We had an assessment process involving a 3-day inpatient stay and often experienced difficulties admitting patients to the prebooked bed due to a lack of inpatient bed availability.We aimed to change the process from a 3-day and 2-night inpatient stay to a 1-day day-case stay to reduce the demand for inpatient beds.Planning the new assessment process involved negotiations with many department staff to establish prebooked timeslots in 1 day. The improvement project was tested and refined through Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles. The liver transplant assessment team used their established once-a-week meeting to learn what went well and to agree on revisions to the process for further testing. The process involved several adaptations, such as the removal and changing of individual time slots, reinforcement of early notification once patients had finished their tests and scheduling a separate outpatient appointment to provide time for junior doctor clerking and blood tests.The new day-case and outpatient coordinated liver transplant assessment process resulted in a reduction of inpatient hospital bed utilisation from an average of 257-20 inpatient bed days per annum. This reduction in inpatient bed utilisation was maintained for 3 years with a similar level of patient satisfaction. The cost avoidance was calculated at £381.96 per patient, which is a 63% reduction in cost. Assuming an average number of patients being assessed per annum of 110, this would result in an average cost avoidance of £42 016 per annum. The carbon footprint was calculated with an average reduction per patient from 618 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent (kgCO2e) to 179 kgCO2e.This project has highlighted how to change a complex inpatient assessment process to an alternative day-case and outpatient approach and could be considered useful learning for other inpatient assessment services, not just liver transplantation.

Implementation of a care bundle improves the management of patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.

BACKGROUND: Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is common and is associated with liver-related and cardiovascular-related morbidity. Our aims were: (1) to review the current management of patients with NAFLD attending hospital clinics in North East England (NEE) and assess the variability in care; (2) develop a NAFLD 'care bundle' to standardise care; (3) to assess the impact of implementation of the NAFLD care bundle. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted to determine baseline management of patients with NAFLD attending seven hospitals in NEE. A care bundle for the management of NAFLD was developed including important recommendations from international guidelines. Impact of implementation of the bundle was evaluated prospectively in a single centre. RESULTS: Baseline management was assessed in 147 patients attending gastroenterology, hepatology and a specialist NAFLD clinic. Overall, there was significant variability in the lifestyle advice given and management of metabolic risk factors, with patients attending an NAFLD clinic significantly more likely to achieve >10% body weight loss and have metabolic risk factors addressed. Following introduction of the NAFLD bundle 50 patients were evaluated. Use of the bundle was associated with significantly better documentation and implementation of most aspects of patient management including management of metabolic risk factors, documented lifestyle advice and provision of NAFLD-specific patient advice booklets. CONCLUSION: The introduction of an outpatient 'care bundle' led to significant improvements in the assessment and management of patients with NAFLD in the NEE and could help improve and standardise care if used more widely.

Simulation and stress: acceptable to students and not confidence-busting.

BACKGROUND: Newly qualified doctors frequently feel unprepared for clinical practice. 'Performing under stress' has been cited as a particular barrier in this transitional period. Conventional views on training using simulation state that it must take place in a controlled environment to benefit learning; however, we attempted to create a high realism 'high-stress' simulated scenario to try and prepare students for stressful situations in future practice. METHODOLOGY: Simulation stations were designed for final-year students. High realism was incorporated, as were factors designed to generate increased stress for students. Examples of this were that tutors did not prompt students during simulations, all bloods had to be taken to a 'lab', incomplete or incorrect requests were rejected and results were received in real time. All requests for senior help had to be made properly by telephone to a 'registrar'.Students completed a questionnaire rating knowledge and confidence of various session outcomes before and after the session, and rated the overall session out of 10. They also provided free-text comments. Before and after scores were compared with a Mann-Whitney U-test. RESULTS: Forty students completed the session. Overall, the session was evaluated highly by students (with a mean score of 9.6 out of 10). There was no significant difference between the pre- and post-session scores. The free-text comments reflected the utility of the enhanced realism and stress. DISCUSSION: From the students' comments we appear to have successfully created the 'stress' we set out to achieve. We were concerned that incorporating significant stress may have a negative impact on learning; however, students did not report a decrease in confidence following the session.

Colorectal stents: do we have enough evidence?

BACKGROUND: The use of colonic stents has significantly evolved over the last few years. Emergency surgery for colonic obstructions is usually associated with significant mortality, morbidity and often stoma formation. Colonic stents provide an alternative way to relieve colonic obstruction, and hence avoiding the risks associated with emergency surgery. This literature review aims to summarize the important current evidence regarding colorectal stenting and show whether further evaluation of the procedure is required. RESULTS: The available large number of non-randomized studies suggests that Self-Expandable-Metal-Stents (SEMS) placement for acute colonic obstruction could be considered as safe and effective alternative to surgery in experienced hands either as a bridge to surgery or as a palliative measure. This evidence has led to SEMS being widely adopted. However, randomized evidence has begun to show the defects that are inherent in the low level evidence that has so far supported SEMS use and it may be that reports of randomized controlled trials may clarify the patient population where SEMS placement is appropriate. CONCLUSION: While we are still waiting for the outcome of the multicentre randomized controlled trials in the UK and Europe, clinicians must be aware of the current evidence limitations and apply SEMS use pragmatically.