Abstract
Integrated care pathways (ICPs) have been shown to have many benefits in clinical practice and are being widely adopted in orthopaedic surgery. A high standard of medical record keeping is important for safe patient care and provides information for research, audit and medico-legal purposes. This study compares the quality of medical notation in an ICP with traditional record keeping.
During a 3 month period 53 total hip replacements (ICP notation) and 30 total knee replacements (traditional notation) were performed in our unit. The records of each patient were scrutinised using a standardised scoring system, based on The Royal College of Surgeons’ guidelines on medical record keeping. Each set of records (83) were scored for admission clerking, subsequent entries, consent form, operation note and discharge letters. The time taken to retrieve this information was also recorded.
The overall score for traditional records (mean 70%) was significantly higher than for the ICP records (mean 62%), p=0.001. The mean scores for initial clerking, subsequent entries and consent form were higher in the traditional record group. It took 35% longer to retrieve information from the ICP group (p < 0.001).
In this study the quality of record keeping was higher when using the traditional notation than an established Integrated Care Pathway. In both groups the standard of clinical documentation was disappointing and must be improved if the potential clinical advantages of ICPs are to be realised. Better education of junior staff and regular auditing of medical records could improve this.
The abstracts were prepared by Mr Richard Buxton. Correspondence should be addressed to him at Bankton Cottage, 21 Bankton Park, Kingskettle, Cupar, Fife KY15 7PY, United Kingdom
