Literature DB >> 16834866

Trauma rapid review process: efficient out-patient fracture management.

A Beiri1, A Alani, T Ibrahim, G J S Taylor.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Our hospital operates a consultant-led, rapid review process of X-rays and case notes of all musculoskeletal injury patients on a daily basis. This compares with other centres where patients are reviewed in out-patient fracture clinics soon after injury. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of this consultant-led, rapid review process compared to standard consultant fracture clinics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective study of the rapid review process over 4 weeks of all musculoskeletal injury patients was conducted. The total number of patients referred per day, time taken to review these patients X-rays and case notes, number of recalls and reason for recall were documented. This was compared to consultant-led fracture clinics, which included time taken to review patients.
RESULTS: A total of 797 patients were processed through the rapid review over 4 weeks: 53 (6%) patients were recalled, 32 (4%) for a change of management and 21 (2.6%) because of lack of information. The mean number of patients referred per day was 28 taking a mean of 28 min; thus the mean time to review one patient was 1.0 min. The mean number of patients recalled per day was two. The mean time taken to review a patient in a standard fracture clinic was 11 min. Therefore, the total time that would have taken to review 28 patients in a standard fracture clinic would be 308 min.
CONCLUSIONS: A consultant-led, rapid review process of all patients with musculoskeletal injury is a very efficient process. The rapid review process saves clinic time and resources, minimises delays in clinical decision-making and saves the patient an unnecessary visit to the outpatient department.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16834866      PMCID: PMC1964617          DOI: 10.1308/003588406X106513

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl        ISSN: 0035-8843            Impact factor:   1.891


  7 in total

1.  Using routine accident and emergency department data to describe local injury epidemiology.

Authors:  D R Gorman; L J Ramsay; G S Wilson; P Freeland
Journal:  Public Health       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 2.427

2.  Diagnostic errors in an accident and emergency department.

Authors:  H R Guly
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 2.740

3.  Interpretation of trauma radiographs by junior doctors in accident and emergency departments: a cause for concern?

Authors:  C A McLauchlan; K Jones; H R Guly
Journal:  J Accid Emerg Med       Date:  1997-09

4.  Value of re-examining x-ray films of outpatients attending accident services.

Authors:  C S Galasko; P R Monahan
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1971-03-20

5.  Reduction of "callbacks" to the ED due to discrepancies in plain radiograph interpretation.

Authors:  C A Preston; J J Marr; K K Amaraneni; B S Suthar
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 2.469

6.  Improving the quality of patient care: patient satisfaction with a nurse-led fracture clinic service.

Authors:  S C Williams; D Hollins; S Barden-Marshall; W M Harper
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 1.891

7.  Value of radiograph audit in an accident service department.

Authors:  H G Thomas; A C Mason; R M Smith; C M Fergusson
Journal:  Injury       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 2.586

  7 in total
  6 in total

1.  The construction and implementation of a clinical decision-making algorithm reduces the cost of adult fracture clinic visits by up to £104,800 per year: a quality improvement study.

Authors:  P Legg; D Ramoutar; F Shivji; B Choudry; S Milner
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2016-09-23       Impact factor: 1.891

2.  Effect of a redesigned fracture management pathway and 'virtual' fracture clinic on ED performance.

Authors:  J Vardy; P J Jenkins; K Clark; M Chekroud; K Begbie; I Anthony; L A Rymaszewski; A J Ireland
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-06-13       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  The clinical and cost effectiveness of a virtual fracture clinic service: An interrupted time series analysis and before-and-after comparison.

Authors:  A McKirdy; A M Imbuldeniya
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 5.853

4.  Routine radiographic follow-up is not necessary after physeal fractures of the distal tibia in children.

Authors:  Antti Stenroos; Jussi Kosola; Jani Puhakka; Topi Laaksonen; Matti Ahonen; Yrjänä Nietosvaara
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2019-07-22       Impact factor: 3.717

5.  Virtual fracture clinic reduces patient X-ray volume for common wrist and ankle fractures.

Authors:  Conor S O'Driscoll; Andrew J Hughes; Fergus J McCabe; Elaine Hughes; John F Quinlan; Brendan J O'Daly
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2021-10-16       Impact factor: 2.089

6.  Paediatric fracture clinic design--current practice and implications for change.

Authors:  James S Huntley
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2014-02-20
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.