How can hospitals change practice to better implement smoking cessation interventions? A systematic review

Smoking cessation reduces the risk of death, improves recovery, and reduces the risk of hospital readmission. Evidence and policy support hospital admission as an ideal time to deliver smoking-cessation interventions. However, this is not well implemented in practice. In this systematic review, the authors summarize the literature on smoking-cessation implementation strategies and evaluate their success to guide the implementation of best-practice smoking interventions into hospital settings. The CINAHL Complete, Embase, MEDLINE Complete, and PsycInfo databases were searched using terms associated with the following topics: smoking cessation, hospitals, and implementation. In total, 14,287 original records were identified and screened, resulting in 63 eligible articles from 56 studies. Data were extracted on the study characteristics, implementation strategies, and implementation outcomes. Implementation outcomes were guided by Proctor and colleagues' framework and included acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, cost, feasibility, fidelity, penetration, and sustainability. The findings demonstrate that studies predominantly focused on the training of staff to achieve implementation. Brief implementation approaches using a small number of implementation strategies were less successful and poorly sustained compared with well resourced and multicomponent approaches. Although brief implementation approaches may be viewed as advantageous because they are less resource-intensive, their capacity to change practice in a sustained way lacks evidence. Attempts to change clinician behavior or introduce new models of care are challenging in a short time frame, and implementation efforts should be designed for long-term success. There is a need to embrace strategic, well planned implementation approaches to embed smoking-cessation interventions into hospitals and to reap and sustain the benefits for people who smoke.     

北京市三级甲等医院结直肠癌患者就医流向规律分析

目的 分析不同特征的结直肠癌患者就医行为选择在中医院（含中西医结合医院）、西医院及肿瘤专科医院间的差异，为合理引导结直肠癌患者适宜就医及制订相关政策提供依据。方法 收集北京地区2018年1月-2019年12月17家三级甲等医院21894例首诊结直肠癌成年住院患者的病案首页数据，采用EmpowerStats 2.0对数据进行描述性分析。结果 21894例结直肠癌患者中就诊于中医院的有862例（3.93%），西医院的有8723例（39.85%），肿瘤专科医院的有12309例（56.22%）。对于不同医疗机构，男性占比均大于女性，58-68岁患者占比最大。且结直肠癌患者年龄、医疗付款方式及肿瘤分期在不同医疗机构间的分布存在差异（P<0.001）。西医院及肿瘤专科医院结直肠癌Ⅲ期患者占比最大，而就诊于中医院患者中结直肠癌Ⅳ期最多。从地域分布来看，异地就诊比例（57.32%）大于本地，且就诊于肿瘤专科医院的患者中73.66%来自外地。患者来源前三名分别是北京市、河北省及内蒙古自治区。而在北京市内，西医院患者主要来源于朝阳区、海淀区及西城区，中医院患者主要来源于海淀区、朝阳区及丰台区，肿瘤专科医院则主要来源于朝阳区、海淀区及丰台区。结论 应大力倡导年轻以及早期结直肠癌患者向中医院分流，充分施展中医药在结直肠癌患者中的治疗优势；发挥三级医院带动作用，建立对口帮扶医院，减少不必要的跨省流动及提倡结直肠癌的早筛早治，以降低结直肠癌死亡率。     

Re‐structuring the negotiated order of the hospital

Researchers continue to lament the lack of organisational focus in the sociology of health and illness. Although studies have increasingly focused on boundaries between organizations, little such research has focused on the formal boundaries within the hospital itself. Given its dramatic compartmentalisation, and continuing prevalence in health systems, the lack of organisational perspective in hospital research limits insights into the effects (as well as the construction) of the order of health work and care. With a greater emphasis on ‘ordering’ in the concept of negotiated order, the aim of this study is to examine the manifestation and consequences of the formal boundaries of hospital departments. Fieldwork featured 12 months of ethnography, including formal and informal observations, 80 audio‐recorded, semi‐structured interviews, and 56 field interviews, in the Emergency Departments (EDs) of two tertiary referral hospitals. Compared with in‐patient hospital departments, the ED has limited legitimacy claims of organ‐specific knowledge to transfer patients out of the ED. The manifestation of specialised knowledge hierarchies in organisational structures disadvantages patients who are older and who have chronic conditions, underpinning the argument that effects as well as the negotiation of stable organisational orders deserve increased attention in the sociology of health and illness.     

SHEL模式下基层医院护理人员高警示药品安全管理培训的效果

目的:探究SHEL模式下基层医院护理人员高警示药品安全管理培训的效果。方法:选取2020年7月—2021年6月在医院从事临床护理工作的80名护理人员,随机将其分为观察组与对照组各40人。对照组实施常规培训模式,观察组实施SHEL模式培训,比较两组护理人员高警示药品相关知识及技能掌握程度、意外事件发生率及核心能力。结果:培训后观察组护理人员理论及操作得分分别为(86.75±6.18)分及(93.19±4.28)分,核心能力得分为(228.98±8.37)分,均明显高于对照组(P<0.05),同时观察组护理人员在护理过程中出现给药前未双人核对、药品分类不清及交接记录不全的概率分别为0.95%、0.95%及1.90%,明显低于对照组(P<0.05),且未出现药物外渗及滴速有误等情况。结论:对基层医院护理人员实施SHEL模式下高警示药品安全管理培训,能够有效提高护理人员高警示药品理论、技能掌握程度及核心能力,同时有助于降低护理工作中意外事件的发生概率。     

贵州省县级和城市公立医院卫生资源比较

目的 了解贵州省县级和城市公立医院的卫生资源配置现状及比较变化情况。方法 收集2015—2017年贵州省县级和城市公立医院的卫生人力、财力、物力等卫生资源配置资料,采用统计学方法进行比较分析。结果 贵州省县级和城市公立医院注册护士占卫生技术人员的百分比分别为49.11%、49.76,执业医师占比分别为24.77%、34.66%,执业助理医师占比分别为1.91%、0.72%;县级和城市公立医院医疗收入占比分别为80.28%、87.93%,财政补助收入占比分别为16.75%、9.86%;万元以上设备均主要集中在10万元以下;县级公立医院医护比逐年上升,城市公立医院略降低,2017年医护比分别为1∶1.84、1∶1.41,床位使用率均下降,分别为88.23%、94.20%;每千人口床位数逐年增加,县级和城市公立医院县级和城市公立医院分别为2.23、2.63张,每千人口卫生人员拥有量逐年增加,每千人口注册护士分别为1.11人、1.25人,每千人口执业医师分别为0.67、0.78人,每千人口卫生技术人员分别为2.11、2.44人;县级和城市公立医院卫生资源配置情况经统计分析差异有统计学意义( P<0.05)。结论 贵州省县级和城市公立医院卫生资源拥有量均低于全国,财政投入不足,县级公立医院医护比、床护比逐年上升,城市公立医院与之相反。     

基于新政府会计制度探究公立医院财务精细化管理

随着社会的高速发展,政府会计制度不断革新,医院是医疗卫生行业的重要构成部分,应当不断适应社会的发展而改革。基于此,该文以公立医院的财务管理作为分析目标,对公立医院财务管理中已有的问题和未来改善措施进行分析探讨,从而为以后的发展提供意见。     

Touring Arkansas: A Statewide Project to Instruct Nurses and Patient Educators on Consumer Health Resources

Abstract

This article follows up a pilot project to help educate local nurses and patient educators on freely available consumer health resources. The Outreach Coordinator and Clinical Librarian at an academic medical center created a one-hour in-person and online class with continuing education credit and an online guide. Nurses frequently act as patient educators at the bedside and are therefore an important target for consumer health education. While nurses in an urban setting may have more access to educational opportunities, these opportunities are needed even more in rural settings. Librarians can obtain funding to travel and teach classes at rural community hospitals.