共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 62 毫秒
1.
目的利用信息化手段进行临床实验室标本检验结果回报时间(TAT)监控,全面提高检验质量。方法通过医院管理系统(HIS)的医技管理模块中现有的医嘱开单时间、采样时间、接收时间、审核时间等数据,设计相关程序,获得各类标本的检验结果回报时间。结果通过对检验结果回报时间的分析找到影响效率的节点加以改进,明显缩短了我院的检验结果回报时间。结论在检验工作日益繁忙的情况下,信息化手段的应用使我院的工作效率和临床满意度得到了有效的提高。 相似文献
2.
临床实验室检测结果回报时间的研究进展 总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1
实验室检查对疾病诊断、疗效评价和预后估计发挥着重要作用.长期以来,实验室注意力集中在提升一些技术或分析质量指标如精密度、准确度、灵敏度上. 相似文献
3.
目的调查和分析基层医院在保证检测结果准确可靠的基础上缩短完成急诊生化检测和回报检测结果所需的时间。方法采用1533例急诊生化标本,分为A组、B组两组,按两种检测方式进行检测,记录从血标本送实验室到检测报告发出所需时间。结果A组(使用普通干燥管、美国贝克曼LX-20湿化学分析仪、医院检验信息系统(US))急诊生化检测TAT平均时间为104分钟.B组(使用促凝剂/分离胶真空采血管、美国强生Vitros350干化学分析仪、医院检验信息系统(US))急诊生化检测TAT平均时间为26分钟.结论在各级医院使用促凝剂,分离胶真空采血管、专用的急诊干化学分析仪、医院检验信息系统(LIS)能够在30分钟内完成急诊生化检测并回报检测结果,值得临床上进一步推广。 相似文献
4.
常规工作状态下对生化检验回报时间的分析 总被引:3,自引:3,他引:0
目的调查当前工作状态下该院常规生化检验从标本的采集到结果报告的时间(TAT),寻找影响结果报告的证据及怎样缩短结果报告的途径。方法测定从标本采集到报告发出的各个环节所需时间,分析影响各时间段的原因。结果平均回报时间是353min,标本从采集到上机是影响TAT的主要因素。结论在当前工作状态下,TAT基本能满足大多数医生和患者的要求。进一步优化工作流程、推进实验室信息系统和医院信息系统的建设和使用、缩短标本采集和上机的时间可望缩短TAT时间约1~2h。 相似文献
5.
生化检验的报告时间分析 总被引:4,自引:1,他引:4
目的分析华西医院生化标本检验的报告时间(TAT),探讨现阶段影响标本报告时间的主要原因,为质量改进提供依据。方法收集临床生化实验室一个月内所有标本的基本资料,包括标本采集时间、标本接收时间、结果报告时间等,进行TAT统计并分析。结果各类标本TAT均达到规定的预期目标值;TAT延长主要原因为:①标本运输费时较多,②急诊标本中大量非急诊项目可导致检测时闻延长;③随标本量的增加,TAT延长。结论优化标本的运送流程与标本接收高峰期的人力物力资源的使用,增强与临床联系与沟通,才能进一步缩短标本报告时间。 相似文献
6.
目的:通过LIS系统对我科急诊生化标本的检验结果回报时间(TAT)进行分析,了解一天中各时间段、各环节TAT的情况,为优化检验科内各环节的流程,提高效率提供客观依据。方法:利用实验室LIS系统导出急诊生化标本相关数据,包括签收时间、接收时间和报告审核时间,以获取各时间段TAT,并进行统计分析。对实验室改进措施前后的标本不合格率进行卡方检验。结果:急诊生化标本的不合格率的高峰时段为8:00—10:00ain和10:00-12:00am,2012年1—6月和2012年7-12月急诊生化的不合格率分别为10.08%和5.42%。结论:通过急诊生化标本TAT时间分析,可为实验室持续改进提供证据,进而提高工作效率。 相似文献
7.
对两种急诊生化检验结果回报时间的调查分析 总被引:2,自引:0,他引:2
目的 调查和分析基层医院在保证检测结果 准确可靠的基础上缩短完成急诊生化检测和回报检测结果 所需的时间.方法 采用1533例急诊生化标本,分为A组、B组两组,按两种检测方式进行检测,记录从血标本送实验室到检测报告发出所需时间.结果 A组(使用普通干燥管、美国贝克曼LX-20湿化学分析仪、医院检验信息系统(LJS)急诊生化检测TAT平均时间为104分钟,B组(使用促凝剂,分离胶真空采血管、美国强生Vitros350干化学分析仪、医院检验信息系统(LIS))急诊生化检测TAT平均时间为26分钟.结论 在各级医院使用促凝剂/分离胶真空采血管、专用的急诊干化学分析仪、医院检验信息系统(LIS)能够在30分钟内完成急诊生化检测并回报检测结果 ,值得临床上进一步推广. 相似文献
8.
<正>检验结果回报的及时性是衡量一个实验室服务质量、服务水平的重要指标,甚至是一个医院综合实力的体现[1]。随着实验室自动化分析仪的广泛应用,实验室信息系统的不断完善,检验结果回报时间(turn around time,TAT)已有明显改善,但检验结果延迟问题仍然存在[2]。日常工作中影响TAT的因素较多,包括医嘱开具、标本采集运送、标本检测、结果审核签发等环节,涉及医院多个部门。国内外均将加强信息 相似文献
9.
检验结果回报的及时性是衡量一个实验室服务质量、服务水平的重要指标,甚至是一个医院综合实力的体现。随着实验室自动化分析仪的广泛应用,实验室信息系统的不断完善,检验结果回报时间(turn around time,TAT)已有明显改善,但检验结果延迟问题仍然存在。 相似文献
10.
急诊生化检测TAT时间的分析 总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1
目的:对临床生化实验室的门诊急诊及住院急诊标本TAT进行统计,分析TAT延长的原因,以便进一步缩短TAT。方法:利用实验室信息系统的TAT统计功能,统计某月门诊急诊和住院急诊标本的TAT,对统计结果进行分析处理。结果:92.45%的门诊急诊标本TAT<60min,平均TAT为28min,达到预期目标,TAT>60min标本有200份,占7.55%;85.05%的住院急诊标本TAT<60min,未达到预期目标,平均TAT为31分钟。结论:TAT延长的原因包括:高峰期仪器的拥堵、非急诊项目的标本多、仪器保养维护以及检测人员的责任心等。 相似文献
11.
刘宇佳 《中国医学检验杂志》2007,8(6):435-435
随着网络技术的飞速发展和普及,计算机技术和信息技术在医学领域的应用经历了三十多年的研究与发展,越来越多的计算机在医院得以广泛应用,这是医院实现科学化、现代化管理的必经之路。自从LIS(Laboratory Information System)检验系统在我院运行以来,深受广大护理人员的欢迎。利用LIS管理下的标本采集过程大大减少了护士的工作量,提高了工作质量,避免了各环节的人为差错,便于标本的管理,具有广阔的应用前景。 相似文献
12.
检验信息系统应用于临床护理工作探讨 总被引:2,自引:1,他引:1
文章详述了实行检验信息系统(LIS)后护理工作流程的改变及为临床各方面工作带来的优点,同时指出护理工作中仍需注意的事项,并展望了LIS系统的发展前景。 相似文献
13.
目的探讨串口通讯方式的仪器主控电脑和LIS软件共用主机的联机方式。方法对LIS联机中标准物理串口联机方式进行物理串口和虚拟串口共用主机的两种改良方案,并对标本检测结果进行传输测试。结果物理串口和虚拟串口共用主机两种方案均能将数据结果准确无误地传输到LIS中。结论物理串口和虚拟串口共用主机两种方案都能满足临床实验室LIS需要,并且节省空间,节省成本。 相似文献
14.
急诊红细胞输注申请结果报告时间分析 总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1
目的对急诊红细胞输注申请的结果报告时间(turnaround time,TAT)进行监测,了解影响急诊输血申请TAT的因素,促进输血科持续质量改进,同时为制定急诊输血处理流程提供依据。方法观察各个临床科室急诊红细胞输注从医生开出输血申请到合血标本采集、标本运送、标本检测不同时间段所占的时间,找出影响标本处理总时间的因素,计算输血科处理急诊标本的平均时间。结果从临床开出输血申请到输血科完成交叉合血(总TAT),中位数时间为138 min,最短为17 min。从输血申请送到输血科到完成交叉合血,中位数时间为55 min。从开出输血申请到血液取用,中位数时间为221 min,最短为21 min,最长为4 266 min(71 h)。所有急诊红细胞输注申请中,约有70%的红细胞被取回输注,交叉合血:输血比例为1.4∶1。随着总TAT时间的延长,标本采集时间和标本运送时间所占比例逐渐下降,而标本检测时间所占比例逐渐上升。结论目前将急诊输血取血时间定为1 h较为符合实际情况;部分临床医生开急诊输血申请较为随意;输血科对部分急诊标本处理不够及时。 相似文献
15.
16.
17.
目的探讨骨科专科护士临床实践教学质量持续改进的方法和效果。方法对广州军区广州总医院举办的全军骨科专科护士培训班临床实践期的教学质量进行持续改进,通过教学质量评分、满意度调查及专业考核通过率等指标对持续改进的效果进行评价。结果对第1期及经持续质量改进的第2、3、4期培训班的教学质量进行评估,2、3、4期培训班教学质量总分较1期明显提高,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。对4个子项进行比较,4期培训班在环境中的实践单元工作和教学环境得分、大纲落实中的出科考试制度和教学查房制度落实得分差异有统计学意义(均P0.05)。4期培训班在教学安排满意度、临床带教小教员总体满意度、毕业考核通过率呈上升趋势,2、3、4期与1期相比差异有统计学意义(P0.05),2、3、4期间差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论通过持续质量改进方法的实施,骨科专科护士临床实践教学质量在学员考核通过率、教学安排质量、带教老师授课质量等方面有不同程度的提高,值得推广应用。 相似文献
18.
Thomas Carroll Christopher Mooney Robert Horowitz 《Journal of pain and symptom management》2021,61(2):364-368
BackgroundWe used a quality improvement framework to transform two-day and in-person advanced communication training (ACT) course into a remote ACT (Re-ACT) format to help clinicians improve serious illness conversation (SIC) skills.MeasuresWe assessed the reach, impact, and costs of Re-ACT and compared these measures to in-person ACT courses.InterventionsAbout 45–60 minutes of synchronous, remote sessions consisting of a didactic introduction to SIC skills, tailored to the SARS-Cov-2 (COVID-19) crisis, and a live demonstration of SICs with patient-actors.OutcomesThe transition to Re-ACT sessions resulted in reaching a greater number of clinicians in less time, although depth of content and opportunities for skill practice decreased. Although both formats were well received, Re-ACT respondents felt less prepared than ACT respondents to use SIC skills. The costs of Re-ACT were significantly less than in-person ACT courses.Conclusions/Lessons LearnedWe provided effective and well-received SIC training during a time of crisis. Future work should further define the optimal mix of in-person and remote experiences to teach SIC skills. 相似文献
19.
Leonard A. Nitowski MD Robert E. O'Connor MD Charles L. Reese IV MD 《Academic emergency medicine》1996,3(8):782-789
Objective: To estimate the rate of clinically significant discrepancies between radiograph interpretations by attending radiologists and emergency medicine (EM) faculty in 2 academic EDs, using a unique scoring system.
Methods: A retrospective comparison of radiographic agreement between EM and radiology faculty members was performed. All plain films initially interpreted by EM faculty or by EM residents with immediate rein-terpretation by EM faculty were subsequently reviewed by attending radiologists. All discrepancies between these readings were reported to the ED on the following day for review by an EM faculty member (usually different from the initial EM faculty reader) who determined the need for treatment or follow-up changes. A secondary chart review by a quality assurance faculty member determined whether radiographic findings not noted on the x-ray log were present on the ED record. All discrepancies from February to June 1994 were reviewed. A severity score was assigned based on the following criteria. Q-0: There was no change in treatment or follow-up; or the initial interpretation by EM faculty was validated by repeat or additional views. Q-1: Discrepancy is minor. Q-2: Discrepancy is significant, with potential for injury or bad outcome. 4–3: Discrepancy is significant, with actual injury or bad outcome.
Results: Of 14,046 radiographic studies eligible for enrollment, there were 134 discrepancies (0.95%). Only 28 cases (0.2%) were found to be clinically significant. Of these, 25 were scored Q-1, 3 were scored Q-2, and 0 were scored 4–3. These clinically significant discrepancy rates were highest for the finger, skull, elbow, hand, and lumbar spine.
Conclusion: Emergency medicine faculty provide highly accurate rates of plain radiograph interpretation, particularly when adjusted for clinical significance and actual impact on patient care. 相似文献
Methods: A retrospective comparison of radiographic agreement between EM and radiology faculty members was performed. All plain films initially interpreted by EM faculty or by EM residents with immediate rein-terpretation by EM faculty were subsequently reviewed by attending radiologists. All discrepancies between these readings were reported to the ED on the following day for review by an EM faculty member (usually different from the initial EM faculty reader) who determined the need for treatment or follow-up changes. A secondary chart review by a quality assurance faculty member determined whether radiographic findings not noted on the x-ray log were present on the ED record. All discrepancies from February to June 1994 were reviewed. A severity score was assigned based on the following criteria. Q-0: There was no change in treatment or follow-up; or the initial interpretation by EM faculty was validated by repeat or additional views. Q-1: Discrepancy is minor. Q-2: Discrepancy is significant, with potential for injury or bad outcome. 4–3: Discrepancy is significant, with actual injury or bad outcome.
Results: Of 14,046 radiographic studies eligible for enrollment, there were 134 discrepancies (0.95%). Only 28 cases (0.2%) were found to be clinically significant. Of these, 25 were scored Q-1, 3 were scored Q-2, and 0 were scored 4–3. These clinically significant discrepancy rates were highest for the finger, skull, elbow, hand, and lumbar spine.
Conclusion: Emergency medicine faculty provide highly accurate rates of plain radiograph interpretation, particularly when adjusted for clinical significance and actual impact on patient care. 相似文献