Communication and Team Interactions to Improve Patient Experiences, Quality of Care, and Throughput in MRI

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 131-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amna A. Ajam ◽  
Sana Tahir ◽  
Mina S. Makary ◽  
Sandra Longworth ◽  
Elvira V. Lang ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Diana Delnoij

This chapter will help you to analyse the health care process and, in particular, the quality of this process and its outcomes from the patient’s perspective. You will read how you can measure quality from the patient’s perspective, how to interpret the findings, and how to take action based on the results. This chapter provides hands-on guidance with respect to the development and implementation of surveys measuring patient experiences. However, keep in mind that this is only a first step in the quality cycle. The results of such a survey give you a ‘diagnosis’ of the quality of care from the patients’ perspective. It does not really tell you what you should do to improve patient experiences, however. To find effective remedies for negative experiences, often you will have to do additional research.


Author(s):  
Diana Delnoij ◽  
Ruairidh Milne ◽  
Andrew Stevens

This chapter provides hands-on guidance with respect to the development and implementation of surveys measuring patient experiences. However, keep in mind that this is only a first step in the quality cycle. The results of such a survey give you a ‘diagnosis’ of the quality of care from the patients’ perspective. It does not really tell you what you should do to improve patient experiences, however. To find effective remedies for negative experiences, often you will have to do additional research. You will learn: how to measure quality of care from the patient’s perspective (i.e. how to construct patient questionnaires or where to find pre-existing ones); how to interpret the findings in the context of the objective of your measurement (e.g. quality improvement, patient choice, pay-for-performance); how to take action based on the results


2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (8_suppl) ◽  
pp. 122-122
Author(s):  
Jennifer Anne Cox ◽  
Caroline Hamm

122 Background: One common model of care within the oncology outpatient clinic setting is composed of the physician and primary nurse. We propose that the quality of care provided to oncology patients can be improved in this setting by incorporating the primary clerk into the care team, working in the same office space with the physician and nurse. Methods: Three care teams operating under the new model of care were observed during oncology outpatient clinics periodically from February 2016 to May 2016. The primary clerk’s interactions with the other team members were recorded, along with other tasks completed by the clerk that did not require team interactions but impacted quality of care. Data was later complied and organized into four domains that impacted the quality of care provided to patients. Results: The contributions to the care team by the primary clerk include improved clinic flow (e.g., ensuring treatment orders are inputted by the physician), patient convenience (e.g., identifying regularly scheduled blood work that is no longer necessary), patient safety (e.g., identifying patients scheduled for treatment with rituximab that have not had the required Hepatitis B & HIV screening), and hospital flow (e.g., preventing additional workload in the hospital laboratory by identifying when lab work can be combined in already scheduled appointments, and rescheduling clinic visits when results are not yet ready, which translates into time and cost savings to the hospital). Conclusions: As a result of the enhanced quality of care delivered, it is recommended that this model of care be adopted in the place of the traditional model, which lacks the essential element of interaction between the primary clerk and the rest of the care team.


2020 ◽  
Vol 81 (11) ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
D'Marieanne Koomson ◽  
Neil Smith ◽  
Simon McPherson ◽  
Vivek Srivastava

The National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death review into the quality of care provided to UK patients with a new diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism highlights both clinical and organisational changes that should be made to improve patient care and outcomes.


2016 ◽  
Vol 195 (4S) ◽  
Author(s):  
John S. Banerji ◽  
Erika M. Wolff ◽  
April E. Slee ◽  
Sydney Akapame ◽  
Kathryn Dahl ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martha Funabashi ◽  
Katherine A. Pohlman ◽  
Rachel Goldsworthy ◽  
Alex Lee ◽  
Anthony Tibbles ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Approximately 50% of patients who receive spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) experience some kind of adverse event (AE), typically benign and transient in nature. Regardless of their severity, mitigating benign AEs is important to improve patient experience and quality of care. The aim of this study was to identify beliefs, perceptions and practices of chiropractors and patients regarding benign AEs post-SMT and potential strategies to mitigate them.Methods: Clinicians and patients from two chiropractic teaching clinics were invited to respond to an 11-question survey exploring their beliefs, perceptions and practices regarding benign AEs post-SMT and strategies to mitigate them. Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics.Results: A total of 39 clinicians (67% response rate) and 203 patients (82.9% response rate) completed the survey. Most clinicians (97%) believed benign AEs occur, and 82% reported their own patients have experienced one. For patients, 55% reported experiencing benign AEs post-SMT, with the most common symptoms being pain/soreness, headache and stiffness. While most clinicians (61.5%) reported trying a mitigation strategy with their patients, only 21.2% of patients perceived their clinicians had tried any mitigation strategy. Clinicians perceived that patient education is most likely to mitigate benign AEs, followed by soft tissue therapy and/or icing after SMT. Patients perceived stretching was most likely to mitigate benign AEs, followed by education and/or massage.Conclusions: This is the first study comparing beliefs, perceptions and practices from clinicians and patients regarding benign AEs post-SMT and strategies to mitigate them. This study provides an important step towards identifying the best strategies to improve patient safety and improve quality of care.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry Egi Aloh ◽  
Obinna E. Onwujekwe ◽  
Obianuju G. Aloh ◽  
Ijeoma L. Okoronkwo ◽  
Chijioke Joel Nweke

Abstract Background: To determine how socioeconomic factors, such as level of education and employment status, affect patient experiences on quality of care for ambulatory healthcare services in teaching hospitals in southeast Nigeria. Methods: The study is of a cross-sectional design and exit poll was used to collect its data. A pre-tested structured questionnaire was administered to clients accessing care in the outpatient departments of three tertiary hospitals in Nigeria. The assessment of patient experiences for quality of care was based on five (5) domains of care: waiting time; environment of the outpatient department; quality of doctor’s care; quality of care by nurses/other health workers; and responsiveness of care. In addition, the overall quality of care was assessed. Results: The mean rating of patient experience for quality of care for ambulatory healthcare services (outpatients’ care) was 74.31 ± 0.32%. Moderate differences were observed between the hospitals assessed for various levels of patients’ care, especially for waiting time, quality of doctors’ care and overall quality of care. Employment status was a statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05) determinant of overall patient experience rating for quality of care, while the level of patient’s education was an influence on the perception of waiting by the patients and their rating of care from nurses/other healthcare providers (apart from medical doctors). Conclusion: The study showed that educational and employment status (measures of socioeconomic status) of patients determined how patients receiving ambulatory (outpatient) healthcare services perceived the quality of care in the hospitals. Hence, in order to ensure equity, there is need to institutionalize patient-centered care, while full consideration is given to the patients’ socioeconomic status.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document