An audit of distribution and use of guidelines for management of head injury. (49/14168)

Ensuring effective distribution of guidelines is an important step towards their implementation. To examine the effectiveness of dissemination of a guidelines card on management of head injury and determine its usefulness to senior house officers (SHOs), a questionnaire survey was performed in May 1990, after distribution of the cards in induction packs for new doctors and at postgraduate lectures and displaying the guidelines in accident and emergency departments and wards. A further survey, in March 1992, assessed the impact of modifying the distribution. All (175) SHOs working in general surgery, accident and emergency medicine, orthopaedics, and neurosciences on 1 February 1990 in 19 hospitals including two neurosurgical units in Northern region were sent self completion questionnaires about awareness, receipt, use, and perceived usefulness of the guidelines. 131 of 163(80%) SHOs in post responded (median response from hospitals 83% (range 50%-100%)). Over three quarters (103, 79%) of SHOs were aware of the guidelines and 82(63%) had ever possessed a guidelines card. Only 36(44%) acquired the card in the induction pack. 92%(98/107) found them useful and 81% (89/110) referred to them to some extent. Owning and carrying the card and referring to guidelines were associated with departmental encouragement to use the guidelines. Increasing the displays of guidelines in wards and departments and the supply of cards to consultants in accident and emergency medicine as a result of this survey did not increase the number of SHOs who received cards (52/83, 63%), but more (71/83, 86%) were aware of the guidelines. The guidelines were welcomed by SHOs and used in treating patients with head injury, but their distribution requires improvement. Increased use of the guidelines may be achieved by introducing other distribution methods and as a result of encouragement by senior staff.  (+info)

Towards measurement of outcome for patients with varicose veins. (50/14168)

OBJECTIVE: To develop a valid and reliable outcome measure for patients with varicose veins. DESIGN: Postal questionnaire survey of patients with varicose veins. SETTING: Surgical outpatient departments and training general practices in Grampian region. SUBJECTS: 373 patients, 287 of whom had just been referred to hospital for their varicose veins and 86 who had just consulted a general practitioner for this condition and, for comparison, a random sample of 900 members of the general population. MAIN MEASURES: Content validity, internal consistency, and criterion validity. RESULTS: 281(76%) patients (mean age 45.8; 76% female) and 542(60%) of the general population (mean age 47.9; 54% female) responded. The questionnaire had good internal consistency as measured by item-total correlations. Factor analysis identified four important health factors: pain and dysfunction, cosmetic appearance, extent of varicosity and complications. The validity of the questionnaire was demonstrated by a high correlation with the SF-36 health profile, which is a general measure of patients' health. The perceived health of patients with varicose veins, as measured by the SF-36, was significantly lower than that of the sample of the general population adjusted for age and a lower proportion of women. CONCLUSION: A clinically derived questionnaire can provide a valid and reliable tool to assess the perceived health of patients with varicose veins. IMPLICATIONS: The questionnaire may be used to justify surgical treatment of varicose veins.  (+info)

Hospital pharmacists' participation in audit in the United Kingdom. (51/14168)

OBJECTIVE: To investigate systematically participation in audit of NHS hospital pharmacists in the United Kingdom. DESIGN: Questionnaire census survey. SETTING: All NHS hospital pharmacies in the UK providing clinical pharmacy services. SUBJECTS: 462 hospital pharmacies. MAIN MEASURES: Extent and nature of participation in medical, clinical, and pharmacy audits according to hospital management and teaching status, educational level and specialisation of pharmacists, and perceived availability of resources. RESULTS: 416 questionnaires were returned (response rate 90%). Pharmacists contributed to medical audit in 50% (204/410) of hospitals, pharmacy audit in 27% (108/404), and clinical audit in only 7% (29/404). Many pharmacies (59% (235/399)) were involved in one or more types of audit but few (4%, (15/399)) in all three. Participation increased in medical and pharmacy audits with trust status (medical audit: 57% (65/115) trust hospital v 47% (132/281) non-trust hospital; pharmacy audit: 34% (39/114) v 24% (65/276)) and teaching status (medical audit: 58% (60/104) teaching hospital v 47% (130/279) non-teaching hospital; pharmacy audit 30% (31/104) v 25% (68/273)) and similarly for highly qualified pharmacists (MPhil or PhD, MSc, diplomas) (medical audit: 54% (163/302) with these qualifications v 38% (39/103) without; pharmacy audit: 32% (95/298) v 13% (13/102)) and specialists pharmacists (medical audit: 61% (112/184) specialist v 41% (90/221) non-specialist; pharmacy audit: 37% (67/182) v 19% (41/218)). Pharmacies contributing to medical audit commonly provided financial information on drug use (86% 169/197). Pharmacy audits often concentrated on audit of clinical pharmacy services. CONCLUSION: Pharmacists are beginning to participate in the critical evaluation of health care, mainly in medical audit.  (+info)

Developing role of medical audit advisory groups. (52/14168)

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the approaches to audit of different medical audit advisory groups (MAAGs) and to consider the implications for evaluation of their activities and their developing role in the light of new priorities for clinical audit. DESIGN: Qualitative study based on semistructured interviews. SETTING: 15 family health services authority (FHSA) districts in two English health regions. SUBJECTS: MAAG chairpersons and support staff and FHSA general managers and medical advisors in each district, totalling 68 subjects. MAIN MEASURES: Structures and activities of MAAGs; perceptions of the MAAG's role and its achievements compared with the initial brief in a health circular in 1990. RESULTS: The approaches of different MAAGs varied considerably: some concentrated on promoting audit and others were involved in a wider range of development activities. MAAGs assessed their progress in various different ways. The importance of collaborative working was recognised, but few interface audit projects had been undertaken. MAAGs had little contact with other quality assurance activities in the FHSA, and FHSA involvement in the MAAG strategy was variable, although MAAGs were taking steps to improve communication with the FHSA. CONCLUSIONS: Major differences exist in the approaches taken by MAAGs and the roles they fulfil, which will make evaluation of their effectiveness a complex task. Already MAAGs are responding to changing expectations about audit and pressure for closer links with management.  (+info)

Audit of thrombolysis initiated in an accident and emergency department. (53/14168)

Early thrombolytic therapy after acute myocardial infarction is important in reducing mortality. To evaluate a system for reducing in-hospital delays to thrombolysis pain to needle and door to needle times to thrombolysis were audited in a major accident and emergency (A and E) department of a district general hospital and its coronary care unit (CCU), situated about 5 km away. Baseline performance over six months was assessed retrospectively from notes of 43 consecutive patients (group 1) transferred to the CCU before receiving thrombolysis. Subsequently, selected patients (23) were allowed to receive thrombolysis in the A and E department before transfer to the CCU. The agent was administered by medical staff in the department after receiving oral confirmation of myocardial infarction from the admitting medical officer in the CCU on receipt of fax transmission of the electrocardiogram. A second prospective audit during six months from the start of the new procedure established time intervals in 23 patients eligible to receive thrombolysis in the A and E department (group 2b) and 30 ineligible patients who received thrombolysis in the CCU (group 2a). The groups did not differ significantly in case mix, pre-hospital delay, or transfer time to the CCU. In group 2b door to needle time and pain to needle time were reduced significantly (geometric mean 38 min v 121 min (group 2a) and 128 min (group 1); 141 min v 237 min (group 2a) and 242 min (group 1) respectively, both p < 0.0001). The incidence of adverse effects was not significantly different. Nine deaths occurred (six in group 1, three in group 2b), an in-hospital mortality of 9.9%. Thrombolysis can be safely instituted in the A and E department in selected patients, significantly reducing delay to treatment.  (+info)

Comparative hospital databases: value for management and quality. (54/14168)

OBJECTIVES: To establish an accurate and reliable comparative database of discharge abstracts and to appraise its value for assessments of quality of care. DESIGN: Retrospective review of case notes by trained research abstractors and comparison with matched information as routinely collected by the hospitals' own information systems. SETTING: Three district general hospitals and two major London teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: The database included 3905 medical and surgical cases and 2082 obstetric cases from 1990 and 1991. MAIN MEASURES: Accessibility of case notes; measures of reliability between reviewers and of validity of case note content; application of high level quality indicators. RESULTS: The existing hospital systems extracted insufficient detail from case notes to conduct clinical comparative analyses for medical and surgical cases. The research abstractors at least doubled the diagnostic codes extracted. Interabstractor agreement of about 70% was obtained for primary diagnosis and assignment to diagnosis related group. These data were sufficient to create a comparative database and apply high level quality indicators designed to flag topics for further study. For obstetric-specific indicators the rates were comparable for abstractors and the hospital information systems, which in each case was a departmentally based system (SMMIS) producing more detailed and accessible data. CONCLUSIONS: Current methods of extracting and coding diagnostic and procedural data from case notes in this sample of hospitals is unsatisfactory: notes were difficult to access and recording is unacceptably incomplete. IMPLICATIONS: Improvements as piloted in this project, are readily available should the NHS, hospital managers, and clinicians see the value of these data in their clinical and managerial activities.  (+info)

Improving information given to patients before endoscopy: a regional audit. (55/14168)

To improve the information given to patients before endoscopy an audit was performed in 16 of 18 endoscopy units in Northern region. Details of current endoscopy information leaflets provided by the 16 respondents were discussed by nurses and consultants from the participating units, and a standard, including 12 separate items, was agreed. Each unit was provided with a comparison of its current leaflet with the standard, which highlighted areas for potential improvement. Six months later the participating units were again asked to provide details of the information; 13 replied, 11 of which had produced new leaflets and two which were in the process of doing so. In the initial survey only 35% (range 8-67%) of the items in the standard were included in the leaflets. Particular omissions were an indication of risks of procedures (three units), notification of follow up procedures (two), details for obtaining the results of the endoscopy (five), advice for people with diabetes (two) and providing a contact number for the endoscopy unit (four). In the repeat audit all 11 units had made changes to their leaflets and, overall, 80% of the items were included. Through this simple audit the range of information given to patients attending for endoscopy in the region has improved.  (+info)

Clinical guidelines: proliferation and medicolegal significance. (56/14168)

Guidelines seeking to influence and regulate clinical activity are currently gaining a new cultural ascendancy on both sides of the Atlantic. Statutory agencies may be charged with developing clinical guidelines, and civil courts, in deciding actions in negligence, could be influenced by standards of care expressed in guideline statements. Clinical guidelines are not accorded unchallengeable status: they have been subject to careful scrutiny by British and American courts to establish their authenticity and relevance. In the United States, compliance with clinical guidelines cannot be used as a defence against liability if a physician's conduct is held to have been negligent, and third party organisations can be held liable if their clinical guidelines are found to be a contributory cause of patient harm. Guidelines have not usurped the role of the expert witness in court. The importance the law attaches to customary practice means that atypical or bizarre guidelines are unlikely to be accepted as embodying a legally required standard of clinical care.  (+info)