Dataset Information

Improving the accessibility of trust guidelines for junior doctors at North Bristol NHS Trust.

ABSTRACT: Medicine is becoming increasingly protocol driven. This provides a standardised format for doctors to deliver best practice, especially in the acute setting. 40 junior doctors were asked to locate three Trust guidelines: venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis; antibiotic prescribing; and management of upper gastrointestinal bleed (UGIB). For each doctor the time taken and number of mouse clicks to access each guideline was recorded. Following successful redesign of the Trust intranet we completed a re-audit. Initial results showed 48% of doctors were unable to locate the UGIB or the VTE guidelines within 5 min. For those who were able to locate the guidelines it took an average of 111 sec and 17 mouse clicks. 100% of doctors were able to locate the antibiotic guidelines in 12 sec and with two clicks. These are accessible via a single port of access. Following our redesign of the Trust intranet 100% of doctors located all three guidelines in an average time of 7.2 sec and in 2.1 clicks. Improvement in access to VTE prophylaxis and UGIB was statistically significant (p=0.001). Redesigning our Trust intranet homepage has significantly improved the accessibility of acute surgical and medical guidelines.

SUBMITTER: Tarrant M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4645694 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Improving the accessibility of trust guidelines for junior doctors at North Bristol NHS Trust.

Tarrant Madelaine M Honeyman Calum C Aquilina Alex A Young Katie K

BMJ quality improvement reports 20140404 1

Medicine is becoming increasingly protocol driven. This provides a standardised format for doctors to deliver best practice, especially in the acute setting. 40 junior doctors were asked to locate three Trust guidelines: venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis; antibiotic prescribing; and management of upper gastrointestinal bleed (UGIB). For each doctor the time taken and number of mouse clicks to access each guideline was recorded. Following successful redesign of the Trust intranet we comple ...[more]

PMID: 26734255

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:The aim of this survey was to determine the level of awareness and understanding of peer review and peer review models amongst junior hospital doctors and whether this influences clinical decision-making. Methods:A 30-question online anonymous survey was developed aimed at determining awareness of peer review models and the purpose of peer review, perceived trustworthiness of different peer review models and the role of peer review in clinical decision-making. It was sent to 800 trainee doctors in medical specialties on the University College London Partners trainee database. Results:The response rate was (178/800) 22%. Most respondents were specialist registrars. Checking that research is conducted correctly (152/178, 85%) and the data interpreted correctly (148/178, 83%) were viewed as the most important purposes of peer review. Most respondents were aware of open (133/178, 75%), double-blind (125/178, 70%) and single-blind peer review (121/178, 68%). 101/178 (57%) had heard of collaborative, 87/178 (49%) of post publication and 29/178 (16%) of decoupled peer review. Of those who were aware of double-blind, single-blind open and collaborative peer review, 85 (68%), 82 (68%), 74 (56%) and 24 (24%), respectively, understood how they worked. The NEJM, Lancet and The BMJ were deemed to have most trustworthy peer review, 137/178 (77%), 129/178 (72%) and 115/178 (65%), respectively. That peer review had taken place was important for a journal content to be used for clinical decision-making 152/178 (85%), but the ability to see peer review reports was not as important 22/178 (12%). Most felt there was a need for peer review training and that this should be at the specialist registrar stage of training. Conclusions:Junior hospital doctors view peer review to be important as a means of quality control, but do not value the ability to scrutinize peer review themselves. The unquestioning acceptance of peer review as final validation in the field of medicine emphasises not only the responsibility held by medical journals to ensure peer review is done well but also the need to raise awareness amongst the medical community of the limitations of the current peer review process.

Dataset Information

Improving the accessibility of trust guidelines for junior doctors at North Bristol NHS Trust.

Publications

Improving the accessibility of trust guidelines for junior doctors at North Bristol NHS Trust.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets