Dataset Information

Improving Documentation and Communication Using Operative Note Proformas.

ABSTRACT: Accurate and detailed documentation of surgical procedures is part of good clinical practice, set out by the General Medical Council (GMC). Knee arthroscopy often involves large data sets which require accurate documentation for future assessment and management. This study assesses the quality of documentation of knee arthroscopy, followed by an evaluation of the implementation of a novel operative proforma. A review of 30 consecutive knee arthroscopy operation notes were analysed for missing information, set against a standardised 30 point criteria. An operation proforma was then introduced, and a further 30 consecutive knee arthroscopy operation notes were analysed. We evaluated allied health professional satisfaction with a Likert point scale survey of 21 allied healthcare professionals (recovery and ward nurses, and physiotherapists) following introduction of the proforma. The mean number of missing items on a 30 point scale was 8.8 (range 0 to 23). Examination under anaesthesia was missed in 43% of cases, tourniquet time in 37% of cases, and wear results in 17% of cases. Following introduction of the proforma, the mean number of missing items was 1.1 (range 0 to 24; p <0.001). This rose to 3.8 after one year (p <0.001) before improvement to 0.7 (p <0.01) with a new and improved proforma. Eighty percent strongly agreed the operation note was clearer, 90% strongly agreed it was more legible, 90% strongly agreed it was more understandable, 50% strongly agreed there was more information recorded, and 100% strongly agreed on the proforma having been improved. Knee arthroscopy is a common procedure with large data sets, which can often be missed or incomplete. A standardised proforma results in a statistically significant improvement in documentation and reduces the incidence of missing information. They are subjectively clearer, more legible, and generally better compared with handwritten notes. This study demonstrates the improvements in healthcare documentation, both clinically and legally, following introduction of a simple proforma. This concept should be applicable to different specialities and procedures in healthcare.

SUBMITTER: Mahapatra P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4752707 | biostudies-other | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Improving Documentation and Communication Using Operative Note Proformas.

Mahapatra Piyush P Ieong Edmund E

BMJ quality improvement reports 20160208 1

Accurate and detailed documentation of surgical procedures is part of good clinical practice, set out by the General Medical Council (GMC). Knee arthroscopy often involves large data sets which require accurate documentation for future assessment and management. This study assesses the quality of documentation of knee arthroscopy, followed by an evaluation of the implementation of a novel operative proforma. A review of 30 consecutive knee arthroscopy operation notes were analysed for missing in ...[more]

PMID: 26893892

Similar Datasets

Project description:Record keeping for patients on non-invasive ventilation (NIV) at St. Georges Hospital is poor. The initial NIV prescription is often not recorded, and changes to the NIV prescription or the rationale for the changes (ABG results) are also poorly documented. This leads to confusion for nurses/doctors as to what the correct settings are, meaning patients could receive ineffective ventilation. The use of NIV is also poorly recorded by nursing staff meaning that doctors are unsure if the prescribed NIV is being achieved. This can lead to treatment being escalated unnecessarily in the event of treatment failure. Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is the provision of ventilatory support in the form of positive pressure via the patient's upper airway using a mask or similar device. NIV is indicated for treatment of acute hypercapnic respiratory failure, of which there are many causes, though COPD is the indication in up to 70% of cases.[1] British Thoracic Society (BTS) guidelines for NIV suggest that the rationale for commencing a patient on NIV and the proposed settings should be clearly documented.[2] Clinicians cannot effectively tailor changes to the patients NIV settings if this information is not clearly recorded, which could lead to increased time requiring NIV or NIV failure. Three main areas were considered important to measure for this project. The initial prescription of the NIV, changes to the NIV settings, and nursing documentation surrounding NIV. A baseline measurement of NIV documentation for two weeks found NIV documentation to globally very poor. NIV was formally prescribed 29% of the time, full detail of intended settings were documented 57% of the time, the decision to commence NIV was discussed with the respiratory consultant/SpR just 29% of the time and on no occasion was a decision regarding escalation of treatment recorded. Eighteen changes were made to the NIV settings. These were formally prescribed 22% of the time and detail of the intended settings was recorded 44% of the time. Nursing documentation included detail on the length of NIV use just 21% of the time, and comments on the NIV use were left just 33% of the time. The intervention was a unified four page NIV prescription chart. Page 1: An area for the NIV to be initially prescribed with reminder questions for important considerations. Page 2: An area for changes to be made to the NIV settings. Page 3: An area for the most up to date NIV/respiratory plan to be documented. Page 4: Nursing documentation, with prompts for the time NIV was put on/off and for comments. The chart was printed at St Georges print services and paid for by the respiratory ward. A further two weeks of monitoring followed after implementation of the new chart. Improvements were seen in all areas of documentation surrounding NIV. The NIV was formally prescribed 86% of the time compared to 29% pre-intervention. The NIV settings were stated 100% of the time in the initial prescription. An escalation decision was recorded 71% of the time. Changes to the NIV settings improved to 92%. Nursing documentation improved greatly. The length of the NIV use was recorded for 91% of NIV days compared to 21% previously (p<0.001), and comments on the use of NIV improved from from 33% to 98% (p<0.001). Cases where the documentation remained poor were in those patients for whom the new chart had not been used. The implementation of a unified NIV prescription chart to be kept in the bedside notes on the respiratory ward greatly improved documentation surrounding NIV. Further work must be done to ensure that the chart is used 100% of the time. This will include adjusting the chart to reduce the workload to use it, rolling the chart out on the acute medical ward, and submitting the chart to the trust board for its acceptance as an official trust chart.

Project description:BackgroundVariable approaches to intraoperative communication impede our understanding of surgical decision-making and best practices. This is critical among hernia repairs, where improved outcomes are reliant on understanding the impact of different patient characteristics and surgical approaches. In this context, a hernia-specific synoptic operative note was piloted as part of an effort to create a statewide hernia registry. We aimed to understand the impact of the synoptic operative note on variable missingness and evaluate barriers and facilitators to improved intraoperative communication and note adoption.MethodsIn January 2020, the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (MSQC) registry was expanded to capture hernia-specific intraoperative variables. A synoptic operative note for hernia repair was piloted at 8 hospitals. The primary outcome was change in hernia variable communication, measured by missingness. Using a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design, we performed semi-structured interviews with data abstractors (n = 4) and surgeons (n = 4) at 5 pilot sites to assess barriers and facilitators of implementation. Interviews were iteratively analyzed using content analysis with both deductive and inductive approaches.ResultsFrom January to June 2020, 870 hernia repairs were performed across 8 pilot and 53 control sites. Pilot sites had significantly less missingness for all hernia-specific variables. At pilot sites, 46% of notes were fully complete in regard to hernia variables, compared to 21% at control sites (p value < 0.001). While collection of intraoperative variables improved after synoptic note implementation, low note adoption was reported. Facilitators of improved variable collection were (1) communication with data abstractors and (2) stakeholder acknowledgment of widespread benefit, while barriers included (1) surgeon resistance to practice change, (2) EMR/technology, and (3) interruptions to communication and implementation.ConclusionThis mixed-methods evaluation of a synoptic operative note implementation suggests that sustained communication, particularly with abstractors, was the most impactful intervention. Future implementation efforts may have improved effectiveness with interventions supplementary to surgeon-level direction.

Project description:A frequently occurring job during on-call and out-of-hours shifts is reviewing a patient following a fall with this often being the responsibility of the most junior and inexperienced doctors. Following a pilot audit we identified inconsistencies in medical assessment and documentation, with 50% of expected data points not recorded. Failure to complete a thorough assessment can lead to missed injuries, prolonged length of stay, and litigation. Using the plan, do, study, act (PDSA) cycle model this project sought to address this through providing teaching to junior doctors and the development of a pro-forma. Three style cycles of data collection were performed; a formal baseline dataset, after delivering a teaching session to new junior doctors and following the trial of the new fall pro-forma. We selected 15 to 17 patient notes to review at random during a one month period for each data collection cycle and compared the medical assessment to the standards outlined by the National Patient Safety Agency (NPSA) guidelines.[1] There were two key areas of improvement identified following the teaching session and introduction of the proforma. Documentation of a fall history was improved by nearly 30% being recorded in 100% of cases after the interventions. Documentation of a thorough musculoskeletal examination was improved from being recorded in just 54% of cases to 77% of cases; it was recorded in 100% of the cases where the proforma was used. The project demonstrated the need to improve documentation and assessment of a patient who has fallen. Initial data collection has shown that assessment and documentation were improved providing teaching to junior doctors and by use of the document. The pro-forma has since been incorporated into hospital policy and now forms the compulsory documentation expected of the doctors and nurses managing patients following a fall. Ensuring easy access to the proforma and re-auditing after editing the document will be the next steps.

Dataset Information

Improving Documentation and Communication Using Operative Note Proformas.

Publications

Improving Documentation and Communication Using Operative Note Proformas.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets