分诊安全管理结合风险管理提高急诊科护理质量评分的作用分析

目的探讨分诊安全管理结合风险管理提高急诊科护理质量评分的作用。方法该院于2018年6月起加强对急诊科的分诊安全管理结合风险管理,以于2017年6月—2019年6月在该院急诊科就诊的患者为研究对象,评价管理策略实施前后护理风险发生率、护理质量评分以及患者满意度等评价指标变化情况。结果实施后基础护理、实践操作、消毒隔离、急救药品、护理文件方面的护理质量评分均较实施前显著提高(P<0.05);实施后护理差错、护理缺陷、护理投诉的发生率分别为0.26%、0.58%、0.19%,均较实施前显著降低(P<0.05);实施后护理总满意率为94.92%,较实施前显著提高(P<0.05)。结论分诊安全管理结合风险管理有效提高了急诊科护理质量,提升了患者满意度,减少了护理风险事件的发生。     

The relevance of Xenophon’s Anabasis and Plato’s Meno to nursing

The current situation in which the humanities are disparaged affects all university disciplines, including nursing, in whose historical evolution the humanities have always been present in one form or another. Looking beyond this disrepute, this study proposes that nursing renew its attention to classical philosophy. Specifically, it invites a close reading of Xenophon's Anabasis and Plato's Meno, to get three related goals: to show how the use of ancient texts are very valuable tools for the philosophical initiation of nursing students and can help them reflect on their choice of nursing as a practical activity; to reflect on the problem of virtue and the nature of the good life; and to show how the interaction with ancient texts allows students to reflect on questions and issues of life, theirs and others, that are not open to investigation through a purely scientific method. Consequently, both Anabasis and Meno readings strengthen the intellectual relationship between philosophy and nursing, enabling the latter to delve deeper into the key questions of its own thought as a discipline.     

Assessing perceived quality of primary care under hospital-township health centre integration: A cross-sectional study in China

Since the new round of health care reform in 2009, the vertical integration of hospitals and primary health institutions has become widely implemented in China as an efficient method for improving quality of primary care. This study aimed to answer the following questions: (a) What is the perceived quality of township health centres (THCs) under integration? (B) What differences could be observed among the three typical integration models, namely, private hospital-THC integration, public hospital-THC integration, and loose collaboration? Two rounds of cross-sectional surveys were conducted from November 2016 to June 2018. The Chinese version of the Primary Care Assessment Tool was used to evaluate perceived quality of sample THCs, and 1118 adult patients were interviewed in total. Multiple linear regressions were employed to compare the quality scores between two survey rounds and among different integration models after controlling for potential confounders. The results revealed that the quality of care significantly improved under private hospital-THC integration as observed by comparing two survey rounds, while no change or slight changes were observed in the other two models. The difference observed among the three models was that the perceived quality of THCs integrated with private hospitals was worse than that of THCs integrated with public hospitals and THCs under loose collaboration, while no significant difference was observed between public hospital-THC integration and loose collaboration. Increased attention should be given to highlighting the tight integration between hospitals and THCs and the different roles played by private and public hospitals in the current reform.     

Preparing IR for COVID-19: The Singapore Experience

This paper describes country-wide special measures undertaken for interventional radiology staff during the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Although each interventional radiology service around the world faces unique challenges, the principles outlined in this article will be useful when designing or strengthening individual practices and integrating them within wider hospital and national measures. Moving beyond the current outbreak, these measures will be useful for any future infectious diseases which are likely to arise.     

A Tool to Assess Patient and Surrogate Knowledge About the POLST (Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment) Program

ContextIt is especially important that patients are well informed when making high-stakes, preference-sensitive decisions like those on the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) form. However, there is currently no way to easily evaluate whether patients understand key concepts when making these important decisions.ObjectivesTo develop a POLST knowledge survey.MethodsExpert (n = 62) ratings of key POLST facts were used to select items for a POLST knowledge survey. The survey was administered to nursing facility residents (n = 97) and surrogate decision-makers (n = 112). A subset (n = 135) were re-administered the survey after a standardized advance care planning discussion to assess the scale's responsiveness to change.ResultsThe 19-item survey demonstrated adequate reliability (α = 0.72.). Residents' scores (x = 11.4, standard deviation 3.3) were significantly lower than surrogate scores (x = 14.7, standard deviation 2.5) (P < 0.001). Scores for both groups increased significantly after administration of a standardized advance care planning discussion (P < 0.001). Although being a surrogate, age, race, education, cognitive functioning, and health literacy were significantly associated with higher POLST Knowledge Survey scores in univariate analyses, only being a surrogate (P < 0.001) and being white (P = 0.028) remained significantly associated with higher scores in multivariate analyses.ConclusionThe 19-item POLST Knowledge Survey demonstrated adequate reliability and responsiveness to change. Findings suggest the survey could be used to identify knowledge deficits and provide targeted education to ensure adequate understanding of key clinical decisions when completing POLST.     

Advancing primary and community care for persons with spinal cord injury: Key findings from a Canadian summit

Context: Persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) experience significant challenges when they access primary care and community services.

Design: A provincial summit was held to direct research, education, and innovation for primary and community care for SCI.

Setting: Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Participants: Key stakeholders (N?=?95) including persons with SCI and caregivers, clinicians from primary care, rehabilitation, and specialized care, researchers, advocacy groups, and policy makers.

Methods: A one-day facilitated meeting that included guest speakers, panel discussions and small group discussions was held to generate potential solutions to current issues related to SCI care and to foster collaborative relationships to advance care for SCI. Perspectives on SCI management were shared by primary care, neurosurgery, rehabilitation, and members of the SCI community

Outcome Measures: Discussions were focused on five domains: knowledge translation and dissemination, application of best practices, communication, research, and patient service accessibility.

Results: Summit participants identified issues and prioritized solutions to improve primary and community care including the creation of a network of key stakeholders to enable knowledge creation and dissemination; an online repository of SCI resources, integrated health records, and a clinical network for SCI care; development and implementation of strategies to improve care transitions across sectors; implementation of effective care models and improved access to services; and utilization of empowerment frameworks to support self-management.

Conclusions: This summit identified priorities for further collaborative efforts to advance SCI primary and community care and will inform the development of a provincial SCI strategy aimed at improving the system of care for SCI.