Survey of outpatient sputum cytology: influence of written instructions on sample quality and who benefits from investigation.
(9/3566)
OBJECTIVES: To evaluated quality of outpatient sputum cytology and whether written instructions to patients improve sample quality and to identify variables that predict satisfactory samples. DESIGN: Prospective randomised study. SETTING: Outpatient department of a district general hospital. PATIENTS: 224 patients recruited over 18 months whenever their clinicians requested sputum cytology, randomized to receive oral or oral and written advice. INTERVENTIONS: Oral advice from nurse on producing a sputum sample (114 patients); oral advice plus written instructions (110). MAIN MEASURES: Percentages of satisfactory sputum samples and of patients who produced more than one satisfactory sample; clinical or radiological features identified from subsequent review of patients' notes and radiographs associated with satisfactory samples; final diagnosis of bronchial cancer. RESULTS: 588 sputum samples were requested and 477 received. Patients in the group receiving additional written instructions produced 75(34%) satisfactory samples and 43(39%) of them one or more sets of satisfactory samples. Corresponding figures for the group receiving only oral advice (80(31%) and 46(40%) respectively)were not significantly different. Logistic regression showed that radiological evidence of collapse or consolidation (p<0.01) and hilar mass (p<0.05) were significant predictors of the production of satisfactory samples. Sputum cytology confirmed the diagnosis in only 9(17%) patients with bronchial carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of outpatients' sputum samples was poor and was not improved by written instructions. Sputum cytology should be limited to patients with probable bronchial cancer unsuitable for surgery. IMPLICATIONS: Collection of samples and requests for sputum cytology should be reviewed in other hospitals. (+info)
Audit in general practice: students and practitioners learning together.
(10/3566)
OBJECTIVES: To describe and evaluate the use of medical audit in general practice as an educational activity shared by undergraduate medical students and general practitioners. DESIGN: A descriptive study, evaluated by a questionnaire survey of all participating practices and by results of completed student projects on general practice audit topics during three weeks in the first year of completed projects (1990-1). SETTING: One university department of general practice, collaborating with 18 general practices in contract with Liverpool Family Health Services Authority. PARTICIPANTS: 150 medical students, working in groups of two to six, and the general practitioners with whom they worked in 18 practices. MAIN MEASURES: The nature of topics proposed by practices and chosen by the students; methods of audit used by students; reported effects of the audits on the practices; general practitioners' opinions of the projects' usefulness to the practice. RESULTS: The range of topics was wide, and both quantitative and qualitative methods were used. Fifteen of the 18 questionnaires sent out were completed. Six practices reported that the final project had changed substantially after joint planning with the students. Two thirds (10) attached high value to the audits and were making changes in the delivery of care as a result. CONCLUSIONS: Medical audit "project work" by medical undergraduates is an effective tool for motivating students to learn and can lead to change in the clinical setting in which it occurs. IMPLICATIONS: By meeting the learning needs of both undergraduates and established practitioners audit project work has wider application within medical education. (+info)
Development of indicators for quality assurance in public health medicine.
(11/3566)
OBJECTIVES: To develop structure, process, and outcome indicators within a quality rating index for audit of public health medicine. DESIGN: Development of an audit matrix and indicator of quality through a series of group discussions with public health physicians, from which self administered weighted questionnaires were constructed by a modified Delphi technique. SETTING: Five Scottish health boards. SUBJECTS: Public health physicians in the five health boards. MAIN MEASURES: Indicators of quality and a quality rating index for seven selected service categories for each of seven agreed roles of public health medicine: assessment of health and health care needs in information services, input into managerial decision making in health promotion, fostering multisectoral collaboration in environmental health services, health service research and evaluation for child services, lead responsibility for the development and/or running of screening services, and public health medicine training and staff development in communicable disease. RESULTS: Indicators in the form of questionnaires were developed for each topic. Three types of indicator emerged: "global," "restricted," and "specific." A quality rating index for each topic was developed on the basis of the questionnaire scores. Piloting of indicators showed that they are potentially generalisable; evaluation of the system is under way across all health boards in Scotland. CONCLUSION: Measurable indicators of quality for public health medicine can be developed. (+info)
Diabetes care.
(12/3566)
Providing good quality diabetes care is complex but achievable. Many aspects of the care do not require high tech medicine but, rather, good organisation. Diabetes is a costly disease, consuming 1500 pounds per diabetic patient per year versus 500 pounds on average for a non-diabetic member of the population in health service costs. Investment now in good quality diabetes care is sound: patients will benefit from a better quality of life associated with a reduced incidence of the complications of diabetes and the direct costs to the health service in treating these complications and the indirect costs to employers will be reduced. Physical and clinical assessments--measurements of blood glucose and glycosylated haemoglobin concentrations, weight, and blood pressure and assessment of eyes, kidneys, feet, and heart--are clearly important, but quality must include consideration of people and their reactions to life and diabetes--a lifelong entanglement--for which much more support should be provided. (+info)
Regional organisational audit of district departments of public health.
(13/3566)
Organisational audit of public health in the United Kingdom is rare. To provide a framework for a structured organisational audit in district public health departments in one region organisational factors contributing to efficient, high quality work were identified and compared between districts, enabling each department to identify its organisational strengths and weaknesses. A draft list of organisational factors, based on the King's Fund organisational audit programme, were rated by 52 public health physicians and trainees in 12 district public health departments in South East Thames region for their importance on a scale of 0 (not relevant) to 5 (vital). Factors with average ratings of > 4, judged to be "vital" and proxies for standards, were then used to compare each district's actual performance, as reported by its director of public health in a self reported questionnaire. In all, 37 responses were received to the rating questionnaire (response rate 71%) and 12 responses to the directors' questionnaire. Of the 54 factors identified as vital factors, 20(37%) were achieved in all 12 districts and 16(30%) in all but one district; 18 were not being achieved by two (33%) districts or more. Overall, vital factors were not being achieved in 9% of cases. The authors concluded that most departments are achieving most vital organisational factors most of the time, but improvement is still possible. The results have been used as a basis for planning the organisation of public health departments in several of the newly formed commissioning agencies. This was the first regional audit of public health of its kind performed in the region and it provided valuable experience for planning future regional audit activity. (+info)
The dangers of managerial perversion: quality assurance in primary health care.
(14/3566)
The promotion of primary health care (PHC) at the Alma Ata conference has been followed by a variety of managerial initiatives in support of the development of PHC. One of the more promising vehicles has been the implementation of quality assurance mechanisms. This paper reviews recent examples of this genre and argues that the thrust of both primary health care and quality assurance are in danger of being distorted by a rather antiquated approach to management. (+info)
Assessing discomfort after anaesthesia: should you ask the patient or read the record?
(15/3566)
OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of anaesthesia care from the patients' viewpoint compared with the hospital record. DESIGN: Prospective study during 1988-9. SETTING: Four teaching hospitals (A-D) in Canada. PATIENTS: 15,960 inpatients receiving anaesthetic requiring at least an overnight stay, for whom an interview and review of hospital records within 72 hours of surgery were complete. MAIN MEASURES: Rates of postoperative symptoms of discomfort (nausea or vomiting, headache, back pain, sore throat, eye symptoms, and tingling) according to the hospital record versus interview and the relation between symptoms and patients' satisfaction with the anaesthetic experience. RESULTS: The preparation of completed interviews ranged from 31.0% to 72.7%, owing mainly to patients discharge (hospitals A and B) and severity of illness (C and D). Interviewed patients were similar to all inpatients in the hospitals but were younger and healthier and more had had effective operations and were general surgical than cardiovascular or neurosurgical patients. In all, 26% to 46% of patients at the four hospitals reported at least one symptom of discomfort. Agreement between interviews and hospital records was low, symptoms being more commonly reported by interview than in the record (for example, headache was reported for 5.8%-17% of patients compared with 0.3%-3.0% in hospital records). After controlling for case mix patients who reported at least one symptom were 2.91 times (95% confidence interval 1.89 to 4.50) more likely to be dissatisfied with their anaesthetic care than patients who did not. CONCLUSIONS: Anaesthesia services are typically neglected in studies of hospital quality, yet patients express considerable anxiety about anaesthetic care. Monitoring and recording patients' discomfort clearly need to be improved if the quality of anaesthesia is to be properly evaluated. (+info)
Can admission notes be improved by using preprinted assessment sheets?
(16/3566)
Inpatient medical notes often fail to record important details of patient history and findings on clinical examination. To overcome problems with content and legibility of notes we introduced preprinted notes for the admission of children to this hospital. The quality of the information recorded for 100 children whose admissions were clerked with the preprinted notes was compared with that recorded for 100 whose admissions were recorded with the traditional notes. All case notes were selected randomly and retrospectively from traditional notes written from April to October 1993 and from preprinted notes written from October 1993 to April 1994. The quality of information was assessed according to the presence or absence of 25 agreed core clinical details and the number of words per clerking. In admissions recorded with the preprinted notes the mean number of core clinical details present was significantly higher than those recorded with traditional notes (24.0 v 17.6, p < 0.00001). Admissions recorded with the preprinted notes were also significantly shorter (mean 144 words v 184 words, p < 0.0001). The authors conclude that information about children admitted to hospital is both more complete and more succinct when recorded using preprinted admission sheets. (+info)