...
首页> 外文期刊>Western Journal of Emergency Medicine >Application of a Proactive Risk Analysis to Emergency Department Sickle Cell Care
【24h】

Application of a Proactive Risk Analysis to Emergency Department Sickle Cell Care

机译:主动风险分析在急诊科镰状细胞护理中的应用

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Introduction: Patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) often seek care in emergency departments (EDs) for severe pain. However, there is evidence that they experience inaccurate assessment, suboptimal care, and inadequate follow-up referrals. The aim of this project was to 1) explore the feasibility of applying a failure modes, effects and criticality analysis (FMECA) in two EDs examining four processes of care (triage, analgesic management, high risk/high users, and referrals made) for patients with SCD, and 2) report the failures of these care processes in each ED. Methods: A FMECA was conducted of ED SCD patient care at two hospitals. A multidisciplinary group examined each step of four processes. Providers identified failures in each step, and then characterized the frequency, impact, and safeguards, resulting in risk categorization. Results: Many “high risk” failures existed in both institutions, including a lack of recognition of high-risk or high-user patients and a lack of emphasis on psychosocial referrals. Specific to SCD analgesic management, one setting inconsistently used existing analgesic policies, while the other setting did not have such policies. Conclusion: FMECA facilitated the identification of failures of ED SCD care and has guided quality improvement activities. Interventions can focus on improvements in these specific areas targeting improvements in the delivery and organization of ED SCD care. Improvements should correspond with the forthcoming National Heart, Lung and Blood-sponsored guidelines for treatment of patients with sickle cell disease. [West J Emerg Med. 2014;15(4):446–458.].
机译:简介:镰状细胞病(SCD)患者经常在急诊室(ED)就严重疼痛进行护理。但是,有证据表明他们的评估不准确,护理欠佳以及后续转诊不足。该项目的目的是:1)探索在两个急诊室中应用失败模式,影响和危急程度分析(FMECA)的可行性,以检查针对患者的四个护理流程(分诊,镇痛管理,高风险/高使用者和转诊)。患有SCD的患者,以及2)报告每个ED中这些护理过程的失败。方法:FMECA在两家医院进行了ED SCD患者护理。一个多学科小组研究了四个过程的每个步骤。供应商在每个步骤中识别出故障,然后对频率,影响和保护措施进行特征化,从而进行风险分类。结果:两个机构都存在许多“高风险”失败,包括缺乏对高风险或高使用率患者的认可以及对心理社会转诊的重视。针对SCD镇痛药管理,一种设置不一致地使用了现有的止痛策略,而另一种设置则没有这样的策略。结论:FMECA促进了ED SCD护理失败的识别,并指导了质量改进活动。干预措施可以集中在这些特定领域的改善上,以改善ED SCD护理的提供和组织。改进应符合即将出台的由国家心,肺和血液支持的镰状细胞病患者治疗指南。 [西急救医学杂志。 2014; 15(4):446-458。]。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号