scholarly journals Improving patient access to medication information: a quality improvement project on patient-centred prescribing

BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S225-S225
Author(s):  
Anna Todd ◽  
Rosy Blunstone

AimsWard rounds are sometimes the only opportunity for patients to discuss medication. Patient and professional feedback on an acute male inpatient ward in South London highlighted a demand for more medication information outside the formal ward round setting. We aimed to have 100% of patients meet our criteria for “Patient-Centred Prescribing” on the ward by March 2021. To fulfil criteria, all patients are offered: (1) ward round discussion, (2) written patient information leaflets (PILs), (3) informal discussion groups, all regarding medication.The principles of this quality improvement project (QIP) were drawn from definitions of patient-centred care and standards of good practice; patients should have access to a variety of information formats, relevant to the individual, and the knowledge gained empowers patients.Patient experience data revealed that 30% of clients answered passively to the question, “Do you feel involved in your care?” We hypothesized that medication discussion groups positively impact patients’ wellbeing, by providing a safe space that facilitates conversation surrounding medication issues.MethodWe conducted weekly audits on patients whose admission duration was >7 days, and recorded fulfilment of the above criteria. At week 1, we introduced a program of weekly medication discussion groups led by members of the wider multi-disciplinary team covering a broad topic range. At week 6, we developed a rolling rota of the discussion groups and posters were displayed in advance. At week 14, all patients were offered PILs through a 1:1 interaction and this continued as routine practice. Medication discussion group feedback was obtained via questionnaires and “The Blob Tree”, a psycho-emotional assessment tool commonly used in healthcare settings.ResultIn 19 weeks, the median percentage of patients who fulfilled our criteria for Patient-Centred Prescribing was 92.86%. After 11 medication discussion groups, 79.3% of questionnaire responders wanted further sessions. 88% of “The Blob Tree” responses collected inferred a positive emotional response after the group discussions and half of those noticed an improvement in their emotional state.ConclusionThis QIP was overall a success; it fulfilled a requirement to meet good standards in information sharing and became embedded in the fabric of the ward, continuing to run as part of the activities program. It demonstrated the impact of education on patients’ mental wellbeing through empowerment and peer support. As a by-product it established multidisciplinary connections and improved therapeutic relationships. Challenges included patient engagement secondary to acute mental illness or negative symptoms and maintaining project momentum following a COVID-19 outbreak.

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vivek Sharma ◽  
Emma Fitz-patrick ◽  
Dhiraj Sharma

Abstract Aims With surgical teams in the NHS pushed to their limit under unprecedented demands, simple and effective ways for maintaining standards of patient care are necessitated. This quality improvement project aims to implement user-friendly and coherent ward round stickers as an adjunct to surgical ward rounds to deliver standardised care. Methods Baseline performance was measured against The Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh Surgical Ward Round Toolkit. Five recorded items were studied including: bloods, venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis, regular medications, observations, and handover to nursing staff. The surgical team was informed of the audit but not over which dates it would be conducted. In the first cycle, data was collected over a 4 week period. Ward round stickers were then implemented and a second cycle was completed 2 months later over another 4 week period. Results Baseline performance recorded from 74 ward round entries showed checking of bloods, VTE, regular medications, observations and handover ranged from 0% to 65%. After the introduction of ward round stickers, a second cycle was performed from 81 ward round entities. There was significant improvement from baseline with compliance in recording all five items > 85%. Conclusion This quality improvement project showed that the use of stickers as an adjunct to surgical ward round is a simple and effective way of evidencing good practice against recommended standards.


2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. e000341 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jimmy Ng ◽  
Ahmed Abdelhadi ◽  
Peter Waterland ◽  
Jonathan Swallow ◽  
Deborah Nicol ◽  
...  

IntroductionIncreasing pressure and limitations on the NHS necessitate simple and effective ways for maintaining standards of patient care. This quality improvement project aims to design and implement user-friendly and clear ward round stickers as an adjunct to surgical ward rounds to evidence standardised care.Project design and strategyBaseline performance was measured against the recommended standards by the Royal College of Physicians, General Medical Council and a study performed at the Imperial College London. A total of 16 items were studied. All members of staff in surgery department were informed that an audit on ward round entries would be implemented but exact dates and times were not revealed. In the first cycle, ward round sticker was implemented and results collected across three random days for use and non-use of sticker. Feedback was collected through the use of questionnaires. In the second cycle, the ward round sticker was redesigned based on feedback and results collected for use and non-use of sticker.ResultsBaseline performance noted in 109 ward round entries showed that checking of drug chart, intravenous fluid chart, analgesia, antiemetic, enoxaparin, thromboembolic deterrents ranged from 0% to 6%. With the introduction of ward round stickers in both cycles, there was noticeable improvement from baseline in all items; in ward round entries where stickers were not used, performance was similar to baseline.ConclusionThis quality improvement project showed that the use of stickers as an adjunct to surgical ward round is a simple and effective way of evidencing good practice against recommended standards. Constant efforts need to be made to promote compliance and sustainability. Commitment from all levels of staff are paramount in ensuring standardised patient care without overlooking basic aspects.


2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_6) ◽  
Author(s):  
V Sharma ◽  
E Fitzpatrick ◽  
D Sharma

Abstract Aim With surgical teams in the NHS pushed to their limit under unprecedented demands, simple and effective ways for maintaining standards of patient care are necessitated. This quality improvement project aims to implement user-friendly and coherent ward round stickers as an adjunct to surgical ward rounds to deliver standardised care. Method Baseline performance was measured against The Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh Surgical Ward Round Toolkit. Five recorded items were studied including: bloods, venous thromboembolism(VTE) prophylaxis, regular medications, observations, and handover to nursing staff. The surgical team was informed of the audit but not over which dates it would be conducted. In the first cycle, data was collected over a 4-week period. Ward round stickers were then implemented, and a second cycle was completed 2 months later over another 4-week period. Results Baseline performance recorded from 74 ward round entries showed checking of bloods, VTE, regular medications, observations and handover ranged from 0% to 65%. After the introduction of ward round stickers, a second cycle was performed from 81 ward round entities. There was significant improvement from baseline with compliance in recording all five items > 85%. Conclusions This quality improvement project showed that the use of stickers as an adjunct to surgical ward round is a simple and effective way of evidencing good practice against recommended standards.


SLEEP ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. A269-A269
Author(s):  
S Thapa ◽  
S Agrawal ◽  
M Kryger

Abstract Introduction Successful treatment of obstructive sleep apnea requires adherence to positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy. A key factor is the relationship between the DME provider and the patient so that treatment can be initiated and continued in a timely manner. Our quality improvement project aims to empower and enable patients towards active participation in their sleep apnea care. Our goal is to ultimately increase patients’ knowledge of their Durable Medical Equipment (DME) supplies company, and thus improve their treatment. The first step was to determine patients’ familiarity with their DME. Methods Forty-one patients with sleep apnea on PAP therapy volunteered to be questioned about their DME company during clinic visits at the Yale North Haven Sleep Center, Connecticut, starting November 2019. Patients were asked if they knew the name or the contact of their DME; whether they received adequate training on PAP therapy initiation; if they were receiving timely and correct PAP therapy supplies. They were asked to rate their satisfaction with the DME on a scale of 1 to 5; one being very dissatisfied and five being very satisfied. Results Only 12 out of 41 patients (29.3 percent) knew the names of their DME companies. The average satisfaction rating was 3 (neutral); 44% of patients were dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied with the performance of their DME. Detailed comments were mostly related to poor contact and communication with the DME. Conclusion Most apnea patients had difficulty identifying and contacting their DME. As the next step of this quality improvement project we plan to intervene to ensure that the patients have the name and contact information of their DME available and attached to their PAP machine equipment. We plan to repeat this questionnaire after this intervention to study the impact of this quality improvement project. Support None


2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. i14-i17
Author(s):  
P Jayasuriya ◽  
Y Amanullah ◽  
A Kumar ◽  
C Hookey

Abstract Introduction Despite growing evidence regarding DNACPR decisions, there is a paucity of information given to patients regarding resuscitation decisions. The main aim of this quality improvement project was to assess and improve patients’ and their relatives’ understanding about DNACPR decisions. Intervention We initially surveyed 30 inpatients or their next-of-kin (if the patient lacked capacity) in a geriatric ward who had DNACPR decisions in place. Although, 86% knew the implications of a DNACPR decision, only 50% knew that a DNACPR decision would not limit them from receiving other treatment. 66% reported that the information given by the healthcare professional is “too little”. 35 questionnaires were also given to doctors of all grades to assess their practice of DNACPR discussions and barriers for discussion. Majority (95%) of doctors knew what should be included in a DNACPR discussion. Medical staff not considering DNACPR discussions during assessment, medical staff not comfortable to make the DNACPR decision and the fear of distressing the patient are the three main issues that were highlighted as barriers. 17% of doctors reported that they would have attended a cardiac arrest at least on 2-5 occasions for a patient when resuscitation was futile. We presented this data and educated doctors on effective DNACPR discussions using video demonstrations in weekly journal clubs. All doctors were informed to distribute DNACPR Improvement After the intervention, only 80% understood the DNACPR discussion. 76% knew that DNACPR does not limit them from receiving other treatment. 73% reported that this was not stressful and 76% were satisfied with the discussion and reported that their questions were answered adequately. 11 out of 30 patients had received the information leaflets and all found it useful. Discussion Although after the intervention the percentage who understood the DNACPR decision had reduced compared to the initial audit, there was a 20% improvement in who knew that DNACPR decisions did not limit other treatment. We hope to extend this study by carrying out training sessions for doctors to improve the quality of these conversations and thereby enhance adherence to expected practice in DNACPR decision making.


2018 ◽  
Vol 216 (4) ◽  
pp. 793-799
Author(s):  
Rebecca Craig-Schapiro ◽  
Sandra R. DiBrito ◽  
Heidi N. Overton ◽  
James P. Taylor ◽  
Ryan B. Fransman ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 209 (3) ◽  
pp. 498-502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brett A. Fair ◽  
John C. Kubasiak ◽  
Imke Janssen ◽  
Jonathan A. Myers ◽  
Keith W. Millikan ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 167-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason M. Moss ◽  
William E. Bryan ◽  
Loren M. Wilkerson ◽  
Heather A. King ◽  
George L. Jackson ◽  
...  

Objective: To evaluate the impact of an academic detailing intervention delivered as part of a quality improvement project by a physician–pharmacist pair on (1) self-reported confidence in prescribing for older adults and (2) rates of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) prescribed to older adults by physician residents in a Veteran Affairs emergency department (ED). Methods: This quality improvement project at a single site utilized a questionnaire that assessed knowledge of Beers Criteria, self-perceived barriers to appropriate prescribing in older adults, and self-rated confidence in ability to prescribe in older adults which was administered to physician residents before and after academic detailing delivered during their emergency medicine rotation. PIM rates in the resident cohort who received the academic detailing were compared to residents who did not receive the intervention. Results: Sixty-three residents received the intervention between February 2013 and December 2014. At baseline, approximately 50% of the residents surveyed reported never hearing about nor using the Beers Criteria. A significantly greater proportion of residents agreed or strongly agreed in their abilities to identify drug–disease interactions and to prescribe the appropriate medication for the older adult after receiving the intervention. The resident cohort who received the educational intervention was less likely to prescribe a PIM when compared to the untrained resident cohort with a rate ratio of 0.73 ( P < .0001). Conclusion: Academic detailing led by a physician–pharmacist pair resulted in improved confidence in physician residents’ ability to prescribe safely in an older adult ED population and was associated with a statistically significant decrease in PIM rates.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document