| Literature DB >> 35399829 |
Yunxia Wang1, Shuying Zhang2, Mingmei Chi3, Junmei Yu4.
Abstract
As an important section for controlling hospital infection, the main responsibility of the sterilization supply room is to clean, disinfect, sterilize, store, and distribute all medical devices that need to be reused in the hospital, and the quality of its work is closely related to the normal work of the hospital. Disinfection and supply department is the premise and foundation of the hospital department, mainly responsible for the recovery, cleaning, disinfection, sterilization, storage, and distribution of medical devices. The cleaning and disinfection work is characterized by strong technicality and high requirements, and the work effect is directly related to the safety of patients' lives and the occurrence of hospital infections. Therefore, there is an urgent need for a scientific and efficient management mode to be applied to the work of the supply room. The traditional management mode has some drawbacks, which affects the actual work of the hospital. Disinfection and supply rooms are an important part of hospital infection control and an important department to ensure the quality of health care. An effective management mode can not only improve the efficiency but also the overall quality of work, and PDCA (plan-do-check action cycle) as an advanced management mode can effectively improve the quality of management. This study investigates the effect of PDCA cycle management based on artificial intelligence algorithms in the nursing management of sterile supply rooms, and the experimental results show that the algorithm model can effectively reduce the incidence of adverse events and improve the rate of sterilization standards, which has certain practical significance.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35399829 PMCID: PMC8986403 DOI: 10.1155/2022/4255751
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
Figure 1PDCA hot trend in Google.
Figure 2Sterile supply room management system.
Figure 3RNN structure details.
Comparison of literature in respect of results.
| Author and reference | Technique | Results | Future directions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bianchi et.al. [ | RNN with time series prediction and problem of short-term load forecasting | Satisfactory results obtained with minimal fine-tuning of hyper parameters, but LSTM and GRU are not better than ERNN due to simple training and simple structure | Problem with gradient-based networks training is slower as the future direction for researchers |
|
| |||
| Liu et.al. [ | RNNs with multiple equilibria | Factors affecting multiple equilibria, activation functions, and multistability and complete stability analysis for RNN | Seven directions are formulated for future investigations |
|
| |||
| Zhang et.al. [ | RNN with time-varying delays | Estimating the L-K functional on GAS criteria of RNN delays | Less conservative criteria of GAS on RNN delays challenging till now |
|
| |||
| Our method | RNN with PDCA cycle | Good results by improving the rate of sterilization compliance, improved satisfaction rate, work quality, and work standardization | Hospital management facing greater challenges till now |
Figure 4Model structure.
Figure 5RNN model schematic.
Comparison of nurses' satisfaction with care management models [n (%)s].
| Group |
| Very satisfied | Satisfied | Dissatisfied | Satisfied |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 8 | 2 (25.00) | 2 (25.00) | 4 (50.00) | 4 (50.00) |
| Observation group | 9 | 5 (55.56) | 4 (44.44) | 0 (0) | 9 (100.00) |
Comparison of the work standardization rate of nurses in the sterile supply room between the two groups [n (%)].
| Group |
| Specification | Partial specification | Not standardized | Normative rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 8 | 2 (25.00) | 3 (37.5) | 3 (37.50) | 5 (62.50) |
| Observation group | 9 | 4 (44.44) | 5 (55.56) | 0 (0) | 9 (100.00) |
Example of work quality comparison between the 2 groups (%).
| Item | Control group | Study group |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Qualified rate of sterilization solution concentration ( | 134(89.33) | 149(99.33) | 14.030 | <0.001 |
| Qualification rate of sterilized medical items ( | 43(90.00) | 49(98.00) | 4.891 | 0.021 |
| Qualified rate of surgical instrument cleaning and disinfection ( | 90(90.00) | 98(98.00) | 4.714 | 0.029 |
| Qualified rate of hand hygiene ( | 134(89.33) | 148(98.67) | 11.584 | 0.001 |
Comparison of overall management quality scores and nursing satisfaction scores between the 2 groups.
| Group | Number of cases | Overall management quality score | Nursing service satisfaction score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Study group | 150 | 92.43 ± 4.21 | 96.75 ± 3.22 |
| Control group | 150 | 80.66 ± 3.02 | 83.92 ± 2.77 |
|
| 27.822 | 36.995 | |
|
| <0.001 | <0.001 |