Upload
lawrence-benson
View
217
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Auditing an evolving Pre-operative Assessment Service 2002 - 2009:
Completing the cycle
Paul Knight, Consultant AnaesthetistJoanna Gordon, ST3 Anaesthetics
Valerie Wilkinson, Clinical Governance Facilitator
Our Audits
Original Pre-op assessment process
Roll out across trust for inpatients 2007
Integrated Care Pathway introduced for inpatients in CRH 2004
Audit 2002
Audit 2004
Audit 2009
Future plans
Background
Pre-op assessment process pre-2004
Nurse & junior surgeon assessed patient approx 1wk before surgery
No formal anaesthetic support
Day cases assessed separately
Audit of original process 2002Both sites Audit (n=764) showed 26% could have benefited from
anaesthetic assessment
7% of patients were cancelled on the day of surgery 1% pre existing medical 0.5% acute medical (e.g. URTI)
18% not optimised Mix of cardiorespiratory disease, obesity, sleep apnoea etc.
The CRH Pre-op assessment pilot 2004
Nurses dedicated to pre-op assessment using integrated care pathway
Support from 3 dedicated consultant anaesthetic sessions
No need for junior doctors
Day case assessments remained separate
Our Integrated Care Pathway (ICP)
The structure of a tick-box, with the accuracy of prose
Abnormalities noted, expanded on and dealt with if necessary
A record of information given and investigations ordered
Patient history expanded on…..and action taken………
Re audit 2004Pilot (CRH) site only Patient viewpoint
Surgical and ward staff viewpoints
Anaesthetic viewpoint
1 month prospective audit elective patients
Re- audit 2004Patients, surgeons and ward staff Patients
73% excellent, 27% good
Surgeons 38% better,50% same, 12% worse
Ward staff (nurses, physios and pharmacy) 42% better, 39% same, 18% worse
Re- audit 2004Anaesthetists
Overall service better 82%, same 12%, worse 6%
Time needed to see patients Less for 80% of anaesthetists
Re-Audit 2004:1 month audit CRH: 423patients Fewer cancellations for pre existing co-morbidities
0% vs 1%
Fewer patients not optimised 9% vs 18%
More patients admitted same day 91% vs 74%
Reconfiguration of Services August 2007 CRH becomes site for
Non-complex inpatient Orthopaedics and General surgery Inpatient Gynaecology Inpatient ENT & Ophthalmology
HRI becomes site for Emergency surgery & Trauma Urology Complex major surgery and vascular surgery
Day surgery continues on both sites
Roll-out of CRH Pilot cross trust With reconfiguration inpatient pre-op
assessment standardised CRH pilot rolled out in line with audit results Time scale short. No fixed base in HRI
Process rolled out 2007 Dedicated unit 2008
Day surgery pre-op assessment remained separate
Audit 2009 - cross trust Looked at:
Patient viewpoint (2008) Anaesthetist viewpoint Timing of admission Patient pre-op optimisation Cancellations Day surgery vs Inpatient
Patient and anaesthetist viewpoint
Patients 57% excellent, 40% good, 1% fair, 2% poor
Anaesthetists 96% thought pre-op assessment service had
improved 19% thought comments from anaesthetic clinic were
occasionally useful, 42% often useful, 39% always useful
92% thought it took less time to see patients
Was the patient Inpatient Day case Was the patient admitted Today Before today If listed as an inpatient, should they have been a day case? Yes No If listed as a day case, should they have been an inpatient? Yes No
Did the patient go through pre operative assessment? Yes No
If NO, why not?__________________________________________________
Did the patient attend the pre-op anaesthetic clinic? Yes No If NO, should they have done? Yes No
If they should have attended, please give details why _________________________________________________________________ Was the patient’s operation cancelled? Yes No
If YES, what was the reason?____________________________________________
How could this have been avoided ? _______________________________________
If the operation was not cancelled, could they have been better optimised? Yes No If YES, how? ________________________________________________________
Day surgery vs inpatient, timing of admission and optimisation Overall day case 42%
Overall 95% admitted on day of surgery
10% considered not optimised Many organisational
e.g. blood results available
Cancellations (34/631 = 5%)
24%
9%
15%
41%
11%
pre-existing medicalacute medicalsurgicalorganisationalnot stated
CancellationsPre-existing medical (n=8)
75% (6/8) day case All hypertension 6/265 = 2.3%
25% (2/8) inpatients AF, Bifascicular block Hypotension & Na+
2/366 = 0.5%
Audit results through time:Patient views and anaesthetic views
2004 2009
Patient questionnaire (2008): Overall quality
73% excellent 27% good
57% excellent40% good
Anaesthetic questionnaire: POA service improved?
82% better12% same6% worse
96% better4% same
Anaesthetic questionnaire:Time to see patients
20% Much less time60% A little less time20% Same time
52% Much less time40% A little less time8% Same time
Audit results through time:Day case and timing of admission
2002 2004 2009
Day case 44% 49% 42%
Same day admission
74% 91% 95%
Audit results through time:Medical cancellations and optimisation
2002 2004 2009
Cancelled:Pre-existing medical
1.0% combined
0% combined
0.5% inpatient2.3% day case
Not optimised 18% 9% 10%
Discussion
60 inpatients out of 366 identified as suitable day case 16%
2 day cases out of 265 identified as suitable inpatient 1%
Optimising Day Surgery Rates Two different pre-op pathways:
Inpatient surgery Day surgery
96% of anaesthetists were happy with inpatient assessment
84% felt all pre-op assessment should follow that same process
Incongruent system
Why does inpatient vs daycase matter?
Patient experience Environment Risk
Efficiency Bed crisis
Risk of cancellation Cost of overnight stay
Portering delays from ward to theatre
Our Plan
Unify pre assessment process based on current inpatient system Decision for inpatient made after poa, only if valid
reasons documented Dedicated area for POA in HRI to improve patient
experience Re-audit!
Further education for anaesthetists about hypertension and anaesthesia
Thank-you
Questions or
Comments?