NEWS
Follow us on twitter: @csjmagazine
Four-hour standard ‘vital for measuring ED performance’
The Royal College of Emergency Medicine (RCEM) has issued a statement to say that it strongly believes that the four-hour standard is a vital measure of performance and safety. It stated that it is important that at least 95% of all patients attending emergency departments (EDs) are seen and discharged or admitted within four hours. Many departments are now struggling with
performance against the four-hour standard and RCEM’s data show a system under acute distress. Some 40% of the hospitals in England taking part in RCEM’s Winter Flow programme are reporting less than 75% using the four- hour performance measure. This results in significant crowding and heightens the risk of safety being compromised.
RCEM also said that, while there is no suggestion of removing the four-hour standard in the short term, action must be taken to ensure decisions are not being made to simply improve the numbers rather than delivering quality patient care.
Data show that in the space of four years the number of 12-hour trolley waits have trebled. However, RCEM claims that the numbers being reported underestimate the problem. It called for the clock to start ticking from when the patient arrives at the emergency department rather than from when a decision is made to admit the patient. Other nations in the UK report the data from arrival. Dr Adrian Boyle, chair of the Quality Emergency Care Committee at the Royal College of Emergency Medicine (RCEM), said: “The disparity between the NHS England
method in recording 12-hour breach data and the actual time that patients wait is startling. This data should be reported from the point a patient arrives at the ED, not as is the case at present, from the decision to admit to admission. “The data is not just about tedious waits for patients, but about safety. Studies have repeatedly shown that there is an increased mortality in people who spend a long time in emergency departments; crowding kills
patients.It is so important that data is correctly captured and that it truly reflects performance as it helps to ensure patient safety.” President of the Royal College of Emergency Medicine, Dr Taj Hassan, said: “The College, based on its own work, believes that only 15 to 20% of emergency department patients could
Tool to prevent hospital inpatient falls
A new tool from the Royal College of Physicians (RCP), that enables ward staff to quickly assess a patient’s eyesight in order to help prevent them falling or tripping while in hospital, is being made available to Trusts and local health boards in England and Wales. Look out! Bedside vision check for falls
prevention aims to support clinical staff in assessing visual impairment in older people. It uses a mixture of questions and visual aids to help doctors, nurses and therapists check eyesight at the patient’s bedside. Results give an indication of the extent of any visual problems that the patient may have. The tool has been created through a collaboration between the RCP and the British and Irish Orthoptic Society, the College of Optometrists, the Royal College of Ophthalmologists, the Royal College of Nursing and NHS Improvement.
Created by medical professionals with
expertise in vision and eye health, frontline staff and patients were involved in its design and
testing. The tool provides a practical solution for all ward staff responsible for patient care. It is not intended to replace expert clinical assessment but, importantly, it can alert staff to potential concerns that can then be relayed to medical teams for further evaluation. People are deemed as having a visual impairment when their level of vision is below that required to carry out normal everyday activities. Such people are almost twice as likely to fall, and to have recurrent falls and resultant fractures, than people with normal eyesight. Falls in hospital are the most commonly reported patient safety incidents, with more than 600 a day happening in acute hospitals and mental health Trusts in England and Wales every year. Although there is no single cause of falls, poor vision in older people is often related to an increased risk. In spite of this, the RCP’s most recent National Audit of Inpatient Falls revealed that less than half of older patients had a vision assessment when they went into hospital. This
10 I
WWW.CLINICALSERVICESJOURNAL.COM
be seen in other healthcare services provided capacity exists. At present, there is a lack of sufficient alternatives – with patients frequently having to wait a long time to see a GP – so patients quite naturally go to their emergency department. One solution to this is to co-locate services around the ED, to allow for the correct ‘streaming’ of patients. “The current situation is also exacerbated by social care cuts, with many hospitals struggling to discharge patients who are well enough to leave but who do not have a care package in place. Those vulnerable patients who are discharged without aftercare in place often end up back in hospital. This means that full hospitals have patients queuing at the front door; that is why there are trolley waits at emergency departments. “The ‘elephant in the room’ is a lack of beds in the community and the acute care setting. This coupled with an inadequate number of ED staff to cope with current demand are at the root of this crisis. A correction of the funding to both social care and emergency medicine is the best long term solution.”
Register at:
www.clinicalservicesjournal.com to receive full access to our online content, regular email newsletters on healthcare news and innovation and digital copies of CSJ.
is thought to be due to clinicians struggling to find a workable, standardised approach to basic vision assessment that is achievable in an acute hospital setting. The tool is available to download from the RCP website at:
www.rcplondon.ac.uk
MARCH 2017
© 2015 Copyright Ronald Hudson.
© WavebreakMediaMicro - Fotolia.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72
