Abstract
Abstract
INTRODUCTION
In the NHS the structure of a “regular healthcare team” is no longer the case. The NHS is facing a workforce crisis where cross-covering of ward-based health professionals is at an all-time high, this includes nurses, doctors, therapists, pharmacists and clerks. Comprehensive post-operative care documentation is essential to maintain patient safety, reduce information clarification requests, delays in rehabilitation, treatment, and investigations. The value of complete surgical registry data is emerging, and in the UK this has recently become mandated, but the completeness of post-operative care documentation is not held to the same importance, and at present there is no published standard. This project summarises a 4-stage approach, including 6 audit cycles, >400 reviewed operation notes, over a 5 year period.
OBJECTIVE
To deliver a sustainable change in post operative care documentation practices through quality improvement frameworks.
METHODS
Stage 1: Characterise the problem and increase engagement through: SMART aims, process mapping, hybrid action-effect and driver diagram and stakeholder analysis. Multi disciplinary stakeholders were involved in achieving a consensus of evidence-based auditable criteria. Stage 2: Baseline audit to assess current practice. Stage 3: Intervention planning by stakeholders. Stage 4: Longitudinal monitoring through run charts and iterative refinement.
RESULTS
Stage 1: Process mapping identified numerous downstream effects of the absence of critical information from operation notes, and the action-effect diagram highlighted the multiple unnecessary mitigating actions performed by ward staff. An MDT consensus was achieved on 15 essential criteria for complete documentation, including important negative fields. Interest-influence matrix identified stakeholder groups with high influence but low interest who needed engagement to deliver change. Stage 2: Baseline audit demonstrated unexpectedly poor documentation: >75% compliance in 4 criteria, and <50% compliance in 10 criteria, which elevated the interest of key stakeholders. Stage 3: A post-operative care template based on the 15 criteria was embedded within the existing IT software. It allowed use of existing operative templates, with a non-overwriting suffix requiring only two mouse clicks. Stage 4: Re-audit at 3 and 12 months showed improved and sustained compliance. At 24 months compliance had declined. Questionnaire of template usage identified problems of criteria response options, and lack of awareness of template by newly appointed staff. Template update improved compliance over the next 6 months (>75% compliance in 11 criteria). Finally, a further reaudit conducted 12 months after the template update (5 years post baseline audit) showed a sustained improvement in compliance (>75% compliance in 13 criteria).
CONCLUSIONS
Simple innovation through quality improvement frameworks has changed documentation practices by 1) achieving a consensus from stakeholders, 2) a “shock and awe” moment to highlight existing poor documentation and increase engagement 3) implementing change which fit easily into existing systems, 4) respecting autonomy rather than enforcing change and 5) longitudinal monitoring using run charts and an iterative process to ensure the template remains fit for purpose. This model has now successfully been translated to other subspecialities within the orthopaedic department.
Declaration of Interest
(b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project.
