Dataset Information

Improving the frequency of visual infusion phlebitis (VIP) scoring on an oncology ward.

ABSTRACT: Phlebitis from peripheral intravenous infusions is an important potential source of oncology patient morbidity. Important factors found to determine phlebitis incidence include the kind of infusion and dwell time of intravenous cannula. Early studies showed incidence rates of between 25-70% worldwide, and association with up to 10% of S. aureus bacteraemia. The introduction of the visual infusion phlebitis (VIP) score tool for assessment of the early signs of phlebitis, along with prompt removal of peripheral intravenous cannulas, has been very successful in reducing the incidence below the acceptable rate of 5%. However, achieving this goal depends on strict compliance with guidelines for cannula insertion, documentation, and assessment using the VIP tool. This study aimed to increase the use of VIP scoring tool to 100% on an oncology ward during a four to six month period in order to maximise its utility in phlebitis prevention. Three plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles were carried out, during which two major interventions were introduced. The first cycle aimed to improve junior doctors' awareness of VIP scoring using presentations in induction meetings and posters. The second cycle ensured that ready access to the VIP tool was provided in the form of bedside intentional rounding charts. Proportions of intravenous cannulas with proper documentation and VIP assessment were measured before intervention and at nine subsequent bi-weekly time points. Pre-intervention, under 30% of cannulas were properly documented and assessed. This proportion rose to around 80% by the end of the second PDSA cycle and achieved 100% by the end of the third cycle.

SUBMITTER: Tzolos E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4645857 | biostudies-other | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Regular consultant ward rounds have been shown to reduce the length of stay and improve the discharge planning for patients (1). To balance the competing demands of outpatient activity and inpatient oncology, it has been difficult to provide specialist care in our hospital. Previously, inpatients were managed primarily by the oncology specialist trainees, who are qualified in internal medicine, with an ad-hoc review by their named consultant. A regular consultant ward round was introduced for the first time on the 7/1/13. Each consultant was timetabled to give a twice weekly morning ward round on a rolling rota. To evaluate this intervention, a retrospective case note analysis was undertaken. This included all patients admitted under oncology for the two months preceding and succeeding the new ward round. For each patient the admission date, time to first consultant review, number of consultant reviews, time to discharge after consultant review, and discharge date was identified. A staff survey also took place. Statistical analysis was performed using Mann-Whitney U or Chi-Squared tests. 85 patient episodes met the inclusion criteria. Case notes were available for 63 episodes (74%). The average length of stay significantly decreased from 11 days to three and half days (p<0.05). The time to discharge after first consultant review also significantly decreased from six days to two days (p<0.05). The number of consultant reviews and time to first consultant review remained unchanged (p>0.05). The percentage of patients receiving a consultant review increased, from 54.3% to 71.4%, though this was not statistically significant. However it is likely such a large increase is clinically significant. Medical and nursing staff satisfaction also improved. This study suggests that a regular consultant ward round improves length of stay for patients. This is possibly because an increase in patients received a consultant review and that the treatment and discharge decisions were expedited after such a review.

Project description:BackgroundGreater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) possesses a harmful influence on quality of life. Numerous conservative management modalities with varying success have been proposed for patients with GTPS. However, it is not clear which treatment is more effective for reducing pain. The purpose of this Bayesian analysis was to assess the current evidence for the effectiveness of conservative treatments on improving Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scoring of GTPS and to determine the most effective treatment protocol.MethodsA comprehensive study search was performed from inception until July 18, 2022, via the electronic databases PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for potential research. The risk of bias assessment for the included studies was independently performed based on the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. Bayesian analysis was conducted by using ADDIS software (v1.16.5). The DerSimonian-Laird random effects model was used to perform the traditional pairwise meta-analysis.ResultsEight full-text articles with a total of 596 patients with GTPS were included in the analysis. In comparing ultrasound-guided platelet-rich plasma application (PRP-U) to ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injection (CSI-U), patients who received PRP therapy experienced reduced pain as the VAS decreased significantly (MD, -5.21; 95% CI, -6.24 to -3.64). VAS score in group of extracorporeal shockwave treatment (ESWT) was significant improved than that in exercise (EX) group (MD, -3.17; 95% CI, -4.13 to -2.15). There were no statistically significantly different VAS scores between the CSI-U group and the CSI under landmark (CSI-B) group. The treatment efficacy rankings of the different treatments on improving VAS scores showed that the most likely efficacious treatment was PRP-U (99%) followed by ESWT (81%), CIS-U (58%), usual care (48%), CIS-B (54%), and EX (84%).ConclusionBayesian analysis revealed that PRP injection and ESWT are relatively safe and effective in the treatment of GTPS. More multicenter high-quality randomized clinical trials with large sample sizes are still needed in the future to provide further evidence.

Project description:IntroductionThe rising prevalence of rapid response teams has led to a demand for risk-stratification tools that can estimate a ward patient's risk of clinical deterioration and subsequent need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Finding such a risk-stratification tool is crucial for maximizing the utility of rapid response teams. This study compares the ability of nine risk prediction scores in detecting clinical deterioration among non-ICU ward patients. We also measured each score serially to characterize how these scores changed with time.MethodsIn a retrospective nested case-control study, we calculated nine well-validated prediction scores for 328 cases and 328 matched controls. Our cohort included non-ICU ward patients admitted to the hospital with a diagnosis of infection, and cases were patients in this cohort who experienced clinical deterioration, defined as requiring a critical care consult, ICU admission, or death. We then compared each prediction score's ability, over the course of 72 hours, to discriminate between cases and controls.ResultsAt 0 to 12 hours before clinical deterioration, seven of the nine scores performed with acceptable discrimination: Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score area under the curve of 0.78, Predisposition/Infection/Response/Organ Dysfunction Score of 0.76, VitalPac Early Warning Score of 0.75, Simple Clinical Score of 0.74, Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis of 0.74, Modified Early Warning Score of 0.73, Simplified Acute Physiology Score II of 0.73, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II of 0.72, and Rapid Emergency Medicine Score of 0.67. By measuring scores over time, it was found that average SOFA scores of cases increased as early as 24 to 48 hours prior to deterioration (P = 0.01). Finally, a clinical prediction rule which also accounted for the change in SOFA score was constructed and found to perform with a sensitivity of 75% and a specificity of 72%, and this performance is better than that of any SOFA scoring model based on a single set of physiologic variables.ConclusionsICU- and emergency room-based prediction scores can also be used to prognosticate risk of clinical deterioration for non-ICU ward patients. In addition, scoring models that take advantage of a score's change over time may have increased prognostic value over models that use only a single set of physiologic measurements.

Dataset Information

Improving the frequency of visual infusion phlebitis (VIP) scoring on an oncology ward.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets