Patient experience is a vital component of quality health care. In our institution we sought to improve both nursing satisfaction and collaboration, in conjunction with improving patient experience, predicting the two are directly proportional. We hypothesized that a more satisfied nursing team would result in an overall improvement in patient experience. To explore this hypothesis, we implemented multiple process changes to create an advanced practitioner-directed floor (APDF) on our 28-bed trauma, medical-surgical unit. These changes included advanced practitioner (AP) 24-hr coverage, implementation of trauma patient information packets, consistent daily rounds with the nurse facilitator and/or bedside registered nurse (RN), and increased floor presence of the AP, to facilitate improved communication between the multidisciplinary team. Nursing satisfaction surveys, postdischarge patient telephone debriefings, and patient Press Ganey scores were analyzed to assess nursing satisfaction, as well as patient satisfaction pre- and postimplemented changes. Our findings demonstrated that, following APDF implementation, RNs felt more respected, stated that the trauma team was more collaborative, and, in addition, overall patient and nursing satisfaction improved. On the basis of our data collection and perspective from nursing staff and nursing management, we support the institution of an APDF to target improvements in nursing satisfaction, by focusing on collaboration and professional practice.
Trauma video review allows for monitoring of performance improvement initiatives, leadership skills, system process issues, and guideline compliance. Despite the well-documented benefits, there are persistent barriers to its use including patient privacy concerns, cost, and provider anxiety. Optimizing implementation by ensuring that informed consent processes are in place, as well as a structured peer review process, can help trauma centers overcome these hurdles. Trauma video review is a unique and beneficial tool that helps tie patient care to quantifiable data, as well as serves as a platform for education opportunities.
Antithrombotic (anticoagulant [AC] and antiplatelet [AP]) drugs have been associated with mortality in geriatric patients with intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). It is unclear whether trauma team activation (TTA) in this cohort impacts outcome. Patients ≥65 years with a Glasgow Coma Scale of ≥13 and ICH over four years were included and were divided into three groups according to type of drug: group 1, AC with or without AP; group 2, AP only and; group 3, no AC or AP. The Rotterdam score was used to characterize the severity of CT findings. The primary outcome was inhospital mortality or transition to comfort measures. The secondary outcome was need for neurosurgical intervention within 48 hours. Logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate for predictors of each outcome. Of 419 patients, 20.5, 50.4, and 29.1 per cent belonged to groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively, with TTA occurring in 39.5, 18.0, and 32.0 per cent of the respective groups. Within each group, there were no differences for the primary and secondary outcomes whether or not TTA was triggered. TTA patients had shorter times to CT (median, 20 minutes versus 80 minutes, P < 0.0001) and to administration of reversal agents (median, 105 minutes versus 255 minutes, P < 0.0001). Age, head-Abbreviated Injury Score, and the Rotterdam score were predictors for both outcomes by multivariable analysis, whereas antithrombotic drug use and TTA were not. In awake elderly patients on antithrombotic drugs found to have ICH, TTA expedited evaluation and treatment but was not associated with mortality benefit.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.