Sakr M, Angus J, Perrin J, Nixon C, Nicholl J, Wardrope J
Department of Accident and Emergency Medicine, Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK.
Lancet. 1999 Oct 16;354(9187):1321-6. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(99)02447-2.
We aimed to assess the care and outcome of patients with minor injuries who were managed by a nurse practitioner or a junior doctor in our accident and emergency department.
1453 eligible patients, over age 16 years, who presented at our department with minor injuries were randomly assigned care by a nurse practitioner (n=704) or by a junior doctor (n=749). Each patient was first assessed by the nurse practitioner or junior doctor who did a clinical assessment; the assessments were transcribed afterwards to maintain masked conditions. Patients were then assessed by an experienced accident and emergency physician (research registrar) who completed a research assessment, but took no part in the clinical management of the patient. A standard form was used to compare the clinical assessment of the nurse practitioner or junior doctor with the assessment of the research registrar. The primary outcome measure was the adequacy of care (history taking, examination of patient, interpretation of radiographs, treatment decision, advice, and follow-up).
Compared with the rigorous standard of the experienced accident and emergency research registrar, nurse practitioners and junior doctors made clinically important errors in 65 (9.2%) of 704 patients and in 80 (10.7%) of 749 patients, respectively. This difference was not significant. The nurse practitioners were better than junior doctors at recording medical history and fewer patients seen by a nurse practitioner had to seek unplanned follow-up advice about their injury. There were no significant differences between nurse practitioners and junior doctors in the accuracy of examination, adequacy of treatment, planned follow-up, or requests for radiography. Interpretation of radiographs was similar in the two groups.
Properly trained accident and emergency nurse practitioners, who work within agreed guidelines can provide care for patients with minor injuries that is equal or in some ways better than that provided by junior doctors.
我们旨在评估在我们急诊科由执业护士或初级医生处理的轻伤患者的护理情况及治疗结果。
1453名年龄在16岁以上、因轻伤前来我院就诊的符合条件的患者被随机分配由执业护士(n = 704)或初级医生(n = 749)进行护理。每位患者首先由进行临床评估的执业护士或初级医生进行评估;评估记录随后转录以保持盲法条件。然后由一位经验丰富的急诊科医生(研究注册员)对患者进行评估,该医生完成研究评估,但不参与患者的临床管理。使用标准表格比较执业护士或初级医生的临床评估与研究注册员的评估。主要结局指标是护理的充分性(病史采集、患者检查、X光片解读、治疗决策、建议及随访)。
与经验丰富的急诊科研究注册员的严格标准相比,执业护士和初级医生分别在704例患者中的65例(9.2%)和749例患者中的80例(10.7%)出现了具有临床重要性的错误。这种差异不显著。执业护士在记录病史方面比初级医生做得更好,由执业护士诊治的患者中因伤寻求非计划随访建议的人数更少。执业护士和初级医生在检查准确性、治疗充分性、计划随访或X光检查申请方面没有显著差异。两组对X光片的解读相似。
经过适当培训、在商定指南范围内工作的急诊科执业护士能够为轻伤患者提供与初级医生相当或在某些方面优于初级医生的护理。