Selecting cases for feedback to pre-hospital clinicians – a pilot study

Author:

Brichko Lisa,Jennings Paul,Bain Christopher,Smith Karen,Mitra Biswadev

Abstract

Background There are currently limited avenues for routine feedback from hospitals to pre-hospital clinicians aimed at improvements in clinical practice. Objective The aim of this study was to pilot a method for selectively identifying cases where there was a clinically significant difference between the pre-hospital and in-hospital diagnoses that could have led to a difference in pre-hospital patient care. Methods This was a single-centre retrospective study involving cases randomly selected through informatics extraction of final diagnoses at hospital discharge. Additional data on demographics, triage and diagnoses were extracted by explicit chart review. Blinded groups of pre-hospital and in-hospital clinicians assessed data to detect clinically significant differences between pre-hospital and in-hospital diagnoses. Results Most (96.9%) patients were of Australasian Triage Scale category 1–3 and in-hospital mortality rate was 32.9%. Of 353 cases, 32 (9.1%; 95% CI: 6.1–12.1) were determined by both groups of clinical assessors to have a clinically significant difference between the pre-hospital and final in-hospital diagnoses, with moderate inter-rater reliability (kappa score 0.6, 95% CI: 0.5–0.7). Conclusion A modest proportion of cases demonstrated discordance between the pre-hospital and in-hospital diagnoses. Selective case identification and feedback to pre-hospital services using a combination of informatics extraction and clinician consensus approach can be used to promote ongoing improvements to pre-hospital patient care. What is known about the topic? Highly trained pre-hospital clinicians perform patient assessments and early interventions while transporting patients to healthcare facilities for ongoing management. Feedback is necessary to allow for continual improvements; however, the provision of formal selective feedback regarding diagnostic accuracy from hospitals to pre-hospital clinicians is currently not routine. What does this paper add? For a significant proportion of patients, there is a clinically important difference in the diagnosis recorded by their pre-hospital clinician compared with their final in-hospital diagnosis. These clinically significant differences in diagnoses between pre-hospital and in-hospital clinicians were most notable among acute myocardial infarction and trauma subgroups of patients in this study. What are the implications for practitioners? Identification of patients who have a significant discrepancy between their pre-hospital and in-hospital diagnoses could lead to the development of feedback mechanisms to pre-hospital clinicians. Providing pre-hospital clinicians with this selective feedback would be intended to promote ongoing improvements in pre-hospital assessments and thereby to improve service delivery.

Publisher

CSIRO Publishing

Subject

Health Policy

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3