Blood tests are a seemingly basic investigation, but are often a vital part of directing patient management. Despite the importance of this everyday process, we indentified the potential for improvement of the current phlebotomy service in our hospital, as both junior doctors and phlebotomists reported a lack of communication and standardised practice across the wards. Resulting delays in obtaining blood test results can impact detrimentally on patient safety and management.We designed a survey which highlighted inefficient handovers and discrepancies between wards as driving factors behind this. We therefore aimed to improve communication between phlebotomists and doctors, as well as the overall organisation of the service. This took the form of the "Phlebotomy Box," a box file system offering a set location for blood stickers to be situated. The box concept was optimised on a series of medical and surgical wards, incorporating multidisciplinary feedback from relevant teams. We measured how many untaken bloods were handed over to medical staff continuously, both pre-and post implementation of the phlebotomy box.Our baseline ward demonstrated poor handover rates of untaken bloods, ranging from 0% to 40%. This increased to a consistent 100% following introduction of the Phlebotomy Box and ongoing staff education. Once optimised, the box was trialled on a further two medical wards and one surgical ward, achieving 100% handover from an initial 0% to 67%. Quantitative improvement was also reflected qualitatively in widespread staff surveys, with overwhelmingly positive support and acceptance.In summary, the Phlebotomy Box innovation has led to 100% of untaken bloods being effectively handed over. We have demonstrated a significant improvement in communication and efficiency within the phlebotomy service, with tangible benefits to patient care, as minimising time lags can prevent delays in clinical decisions. The phlebotomy box represents a simplistic, sustainable intervention that could be easily replicated in other Trusts.
PROBLEMBlood tests are a seemingly basic investigation, but are often a vital part of directing patient management. The inpatient phlebotomy service at the Royal United Hospital (RUH), Bath, UK, is a daily service which relies on effective communication between the phlebotomy team and ward-based healthcare professionals. The service currently covers approximately twenty separate hospital wards, and serves a proportion of the Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust's patient capacity of 565 beds.Blood stickers for patients who require blood to be taken are typically printed out in the afternoons, predominantly by junior doctors but also by nursing staff. These stickers are then left out for phlebotomist collection the following morning, with collected blood samples being sent to the laboratory for processing. Ideally the results are available by the early afternoon, allowing decisions regarding patient management to be made by their team within working hours.Despite the importance...
ObjectivesThe primary objective was to examine trends in new HIV diagnoses in a UK area of high HIV prevalence between 2000 and 2012 with respect to site of diagnosis and stage of HIV infection.DesignSingle-centre observational cohort study.SettingAn outpatient HIV department in a secondary care UK hospital.Participants1359 HIV-infected adults.Main Outcome MeasuresDemographic information (age, gender, ethnicity, and sexual orientation), site of initial HIV diagnosis (Routine settings such as HIV/GUM clinics versus Non-Routine settings such as primary care and community venues), stage of HIV infection, CD4 count and seroconversion symptoms were collated for each participant.ResultsThere was a significant increase in the proportion of new HIV diagnoses made in Non-Routine settings (from 27.0% in 2000 to 58.8% in 2012; p<0.001). Overall there was a decrease in the rate of late diagnosis from 50.7% to 32.9% (p=0.001). Diagnosis of recent infection increased from 23.0% to 47.1% (p=0.001). Of those with recent infection, significantly more patients were likely to report symptoms consistent with a seroconversion illness over the 13 years (17.6% to 65.0%; p<0.001).ConclusionsThis is the first study, we believe, to demonstrate significant improvements in HIV diagnosis and a shift in diagnosis of HIV from HIV/GUM settings to primary practice and community settings due to multiple initiatives.
Gout is the most common inflammatory arthritis worldwide. Its principal risk factor is hyperuricaemia. While gout has been described in HIV patients and numerous more outdated anti-retroviral therapies (ARTs) have been implicated, there have been few recent studies. Our case–control study investigated the prevalence of and risk factors for gout in an established HIV cohort. Cases were identified from database searches using key search terms, with two age- and gender-matched controls. These were compared for demographic factors, co-morbidities, HIV factors and ART exposure. Forty-five cases with gout were identified (point prevalence 2.2%). All were male and were more likely than controls to be of black African origin. Hypertension was associated with an almost five-fold increased gout risk (OR 4.8, 95% CI 1.8–12.4). No individual drug or ART class was associated with gout in this study but exposure to non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors had a significantly protective effect against the risk of gout (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1–0.9). Our data suggest that gout is common in HIV patients and that the traditional risk factors, especially hypertension, play a key role. Gout and hyperuricaemia should be regarded as a biomarker of cardiovascular disease in HIV patients as they are in the general population.
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.