医院档案综合管理的意义及对策

对我国医院目前档案管理的现状,档案信息资源在医院现代化建设中的作用以及实行医院档案综合管理的重要意义及对策进行了全面系统地分析,强调了实现医院档案规范化、科学化和现代化管理的重要性和紧迫性。     

医疗设备管理帐目、资产卡组合的Excel实现

对医疗设备管理帐目、资产卡基本管理模式进行分析和Excel功能比较优选，运用Excel组合功能满足业务流程需要，解决帐、卡分立的现象，达到及时、全面、直观地掌握医疗设备信息的目的。     

2种清洗设备洗涤医用器械的质量分析

目的通过观察全自动清洗消毒器与超声波清洗机洗涤不同类医用器械的质量,找出不同器械的最佳洗涤方法,为制订各种器械洗涤流程提供依据。方法将回收器械随机分为A洗涤法和B洗涤法。A洗涤法:将回收器械直接放入全自动清洗消毒器内按程序进行清洗、消毒和干燥。B洗涤法:将器械放入超声波机内按程序加酶浸泡、超声波清洗、冷水热水喷淋清洗消毒、上油烘干。比较2种洗涤方法的洗涤效果。结果A洗涤法洗涤后齿类器械剩余残留物为0.52‰,非齿类器械剩余残留物为0.07‰,2种器械洗涤效果差异有统计学意义(!2=28.189,P=0.000),洗涤齿类器械效果差;B洗涤法洗涤齿类器械剩余残留物为0.04‰,非齿类器械剩余残留物为0.01‰,2种器械洗涤效果差异无统计学意义(!2=1.008,P=0.313)。而2组洗涤法洗涤齿类器械效果有统计学意义(!2=44.097,P=0.000);非齿类器械洗涤后剩余残留物对比不明显,洗涤效果差异无统计学意义(!2=2.667,P=0.102)。结论采用超声波清洗机清洗齿类器械洗涤效果佳;而采用全自动清洗消毒器洗涤齿类器械洗涤效果差,但洗涤非齿类器械洗涤容量大,效果好。     

医院信息系统变更的主要原因及对策

目的本文以医院信息系统（hispitalinformation system，HIS）系统实施的一般规律为例，讨论了HIS系统实施的一般规律，深入探讨了范围变更产生的原因、接受依据以及管理技术，对于HIS系统实施中最常发生的范围变更管理提出了对策，以使医院业务与HIS软件系统有机会结合在一起，真正实现医院业务信息化的目标。方法文章认为，系统范围变更管理应贯穿于系统实施过程的始终，每一项需求变更都应分析其产生的原因、对医院业务的影响和对系统实施的影响，以确定是否接受范围变更。结果当决定接受或拒绝范围变更申请时，信息科都应与提供产品公司的实施工程师沟通。结论在范围变更管理中，要充分使用好文档模板，并制定出规范的范围变更管理流程，以提高范围变更管理效率。     

病案质量问题与改进

病案作为记录医疗活动过程的重要载体,包含着各类丰富的信息。医疗服务质量评价有很多内容是通过病案实现的。作者分析了包括"三级医师查房"在内的20余项在病案中反映的医疗服务质量项目,指出影响质量判断的常见因素,并提出解决的对策与措施。     

规范临床新技术、新项目管理的做法与体会

探讨安徽省立医院规范临床新技术、新项目管理的做法:一是明确新技术、新项目的管理范畴和管理部门;二是抓好申报与管理的三个环节;三是管理与激励并重,实现两个效益稳步增长.并结合三年来的实践谈自身体会.     

Effects of self-management training in Type 2 diabetes: a randomized, prospective trial.

AIMS: The efficacy of three education programmes for Type 2 diabetic patients was tested in a randomized trial. A didactic-oriented training programme (treatment A) was compared with a self-management-oriented programme delivered in group sessions (treatment B). The latter programme was compared with a more individualized approach (treatment C). METHODS: One hundred and eighty-one Type 2 diabetic patients (age 55.6 +/- 6.3 years, diabetes duration 6.6 +/- 6.2 years, HbA(1c) 7.8 +/- 1.6%, female 49.7%) took part. Efficacy was assessed 3 months (t1) after baseline (t0) and at a follow-up 15 months (t2) after baseline. RESULTS: The fall in HbA(1c) in treatment B at t1 was sustained at t2 (t0 8.1 +/- 1.8%, t1 7.3 +/- 1.7%, t2 7.4 +/- 1.9%). In treatment A, HbA(1c) was unchanged throughout (t0 7.6 +/- 1.5%, t1 7.5 +/- 1.3%, t2 7.7 +/- 1.7%; treatment A vs. treatment B; P < 0.05). With the more individualized approach of treatment C, there was a fall in HbA(1c) at t1, but this was not sustained at t2 (t0 7.8 +/- 1.6%, t1 7.1 +/- 1.3%, t2 7.6 +/- 1.6%; treatment B vs. treatment C; P = 0.73). There were also significant benefits in treatment B subjects compared with treatment A in further medical (body mass index and fasting blood glucose), psychological (control, irritability and hunger dependency of eating behaviour, and trait anxiety) and behavioural (exercise) variables. There were no significant benefits of the more individualized treatment C compared with group treatment B. No significant differences were found regarding triglyceride levels, high-density lipoprotein, diabetes-related knowledge, negative well-being, urine or blood glucose levels or foot care. CONCLUSION: Self-management training had a significantly higher medium-term efficacy than didactic diabetes education. The group sessions were more effective than a more individualized approach.