Aim: To substantiate the anticipated benefits of the original acuity-adaptable care delivery model as defined by innovator Ann Hendrich. Background: In today's conveyor belt approach to healthcare, upon admission and through discharge, patients are commonly transferred based on changing acuity needs. Wasted time and money and inefficiencies in hospital operations often result—in addition to jeopardizing patient safety. In the last decade, a handful of hospitals pioneered the implementation of the acuity-adaptable care delivery model. Built on the concept of eliminating patient transfers, the projected outcomes of acuity-adaptable units—decreased average lengths of stay, increased patient safety and satisfaction, and increased nurses' satisfaction from reduced walking distances—make a good case for a model patient room. Conclusion: Although some hospitals experienced the projected benefits of the acuity-adaptable care delivery model, sustaining the outcomes proved to be difficult; hence, the original definition of acuity-adaptable units has not fared well. Variations on the original concept demonstrate that eliminating patient transfers has not been completely abandoned in healthcare redesign and construction initiatives. Terms such as flex-up, flex-down, universal room, and single-stay unit have since emerged. These variations convolute the search for empirical evidence to support the anticipated benefits of the original concept. To determine the future of this concept and its variants, a significant amount of outcome data must be generated by piloting the concept in different hospital settings. As further refinements and adjustments to the concept emerge, the acuity-adaptable room may find a place in future hospitals.
Letter to the Editor. The future of patient safety in neurological surgery
