The influence of organisational factors on the quality of hospital coding using the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Health Related Problems, 10th Revision, Australian Modification (ICD-10-AM) was investigated using a mixed quantitative-qualitative approach. The organisational variables studied were: hospital specialty; geographical locality; structural characteristics of the coding unit; education, training and resource supports for Clinical Coders; and quality control mechanisms. Baseline data on the hospitals' coding quality, measured by the Performance Indicators for Coding Quality tool, were used as an independent index measure. No differences were found in error rates between rural and metropolitan hospitals, or general and specialist hospitals. Clinical Coder allocation to "general" rather than "specialist" unit coding resulted in fewer errors. Coding Managers reported that coding quality can be improved by: Coders engaging in a variety of role behaviours; improved Coder career opportunities; higher staffing levels; reduced throughput; fewer time constraints on coding outputs and associated work; and increased Coder interactions with medical staff.
An "incidence flag" is essential to identify those adverse events for which a hospital has unambiguous responsibility. Using such a flag, secondary analysis of administrative data can provide hospital quality assurance programmes with a comprehensive view of all adverse events (not just "sentinel" events) at a reasonable cost and with more timely results than more intensive methods can achieve. Although the method is likely to underestimate the true rate of adverse events (in particular, by not capturing adverse events which only manifest after discharge), in this study of Australian hospitals, rates of adverse events were found to be similar to those derived from studies using manual review of patient records.
Background Health care systems are increasingly looking to mobile device technologies (mobile health) to improve patient experience and health outcomes. SecondEars is a smartphone app designed to allow patients to audio-record medical consultations to improve recall, understanding, and health care self-management. Novel health interventions such as SecondEars often fail to be implemented post pilot-testing owing to inadequate user experience (UX) assessment, a key component of a comprehensive implementation strategy. Objective This study aimed to pilot the SecondEars app within an active clinical setting to identify factors necessary for optimal implementation. Objectives were to (1) investigate patient UX and acceptability, utility, and satisfaction with the SecondEars app, and (2) understand health professional perspectives on issues, solutions, and strategies for effective implementation of SecondEars. Methods A mixed methods implementation study was employed. Patients were invited to test the app to record consultations with participating oncology health professionals. Follow-up interviews were conducted with all participating patients (or carers) and health professionals, regarding uptake and extent of app use. Responses to the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) were also collected. Interviews were analyzed using interpretive descriptive methodology; all quantitative data were analyzed descriptively. Results A total of 24 patients used SecondEars to record consultations with 10 multidisciplinary health professionals. In all, 22 of these patients used SecondEars to listen to all or part of the recording, either alone or with family. All 100% of patient participants reported in the MARS that they would use SecondEars again and recommend it to others. A total of 3 themes were identified from the patient interviews relating to the UX of SecondEars: empowerment, facilitating support in cancer care, and usability. Further, 5 themes were identified from the health professional interviews relating to implementation of SecondEars: changing hospital culture, mitigating medico-legal concerns, improving patient care, communication, and practical implementation solutions. Conclusions Data collected during pilot testing regarding recording use, UX, and health professional and patient perspectives will be important for designing an effective implementation strategy for SecondEars. Those testing the app found it useful and felt that it could facilitate the benefits of consultation recordings, along with providing patient empowerment and support. Potential issues regarding implementation were discussed, and solutions were generated. Trial Registration Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12618000730202; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=373915&isClinicalTrial=False
The purpose of this document was to define the correct technique for obtaining a urine sample from a urostomy, ileal, or colon conduit. While healthcare providers do not commonly encounter patients with a urostomy, knowledge of the correct procedure to obtain a urine specimen is essential. Urine samples obtained incorrectly from a urostomy can lead to inaccurate cultures, resulting in an improper diagnosis and treatment, which can endanger the life of a patient. This column presents patient preparation, the procedure to obtain a specimen with and without a catheter, and aftercare of the patient and specimen. This best practice guideline has been developed by a panel of certified ostomy nurses serving on the Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nurses (WOCN) Society's Clinical Practice Ostomy Committee. The guideline has undergone content validation through a consensus-building process by the WOCN Society, which was managed by the Center for Clinical Investigation.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.