Quality & Risk Management Unit, St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Int Wound J. 2011 Apr;8(2):145-54. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2010.00761.x. Epub 2011 Jan 28.
This article describes the barriers, changes and achievements related to implementing one element of a wound care programme being best practice care. With the absence of a coordinated approach to wound care, clinical practice within our Area Health Service (AHS) was diverse, inconsistent and sometimes outdated. This was costly and harmful, leading to overuse of unhelpful care, underuse of effective care and errors in execution. The major aim was to improve the outcomes and quality of life for patients with wound care problems within our community. A collaborative across ten sites/services developed, implemented and evaluated policies and guidelines based on evidence-based bundles of care. Key barriers were local resistance and lack of experience in implementing structural and cultural changes. This was addressed by appointing a wound care programme manager, commissioning of a strategic oversight committee and local wound care committees. The techniques of spread and adoption were used, with early adopters making changes observable and allowing local adaption of guidelines, where appropriate. Deployment and improvement results varied across the sites, ranging from activity but no changes in practice to modest improvement in practice. Evaluating implementation of the leg ulcer guideline as an exemplar, it was demonstrated that there was a statistically significant improvement in overall compliance from 26% to 84%. However, only 7·7% of patients received all interventions to which they were entitled. Compliance with the eight individual interventions of the bundle ranged from 26% to 84%. Generic performance was evaluated against the wound assessment, treatment and evaluation plan with an average compliance of 70%. Early results identified that 20% of wounds were healed within the target of 10 days. As more standardised process are implemented, clinical outcomes should continue to improve and costs decrease.
本文描述了在实施伤口护理计划的一个方面(即最佳实践护理)时所面临的障碍、变化和成就。由于缺乏协调一致的伤口护理方法,我们的地区卫生服务(AHS)的临床实践存在多样性、不一致性,有时甚至是过时的。这不仅代价高昂,而且对患者有害,导致无益护理的过度使用、有效护理的不足使用以及执行中的错误。主要目标是改善我们社区中患有伤口护理问题的患者的结局和生活质量。十个地点/服务部门之间的合作制定、实施和评估了基于循证护理包的政策和指南。主要障碍是当地的抵制和缺乏实施结构性和文化变革的经验。通过任命一名伤口护理计划经理、委托一个战略监督委员会和当地伤口护理委员会,解决了这个问题。采用了传播和采用技术,让早期采用者使变革可见,并允许当地适当调整指南。部署和改进结果在各地点之间有所不同,从仅有活动但实践没有变化到实践略有改善不等。以评估腿部溃疡指南的实施为例,结果表明,总体依从性从 26%提高到 84%,具有统计学意义。然而,只有 7.7%的患者接受了他们有权接受的所有干预措施。捆绑包的八项单独干预措施的依从性从 26%到 84%不等。通用性能根据伤口评估、治疗和评估计划进行评估,平均依从率为 70%。早期结果表明,20%的伤口在 10 天的目标内愈合。随着更标准化流程的实施,临床结果应继续改善,成本应降低。