McHugh Megan, Kang Raymond, Cohen Alan B, Restuccia Joseph D, Hasnain-Wynia Romana
Institute for Healthcare Studies, Department of Emergency Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, USA.
Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2012 May;38(5):229-34. doi: 10.1016/s1553-7250(12)38029-x.
Hospital governing boards influence the quality of care that hospitals provide by holding senior leaders and managers accountable. A study was conducted to determine whether reporting data on emergency department (ED) crowding to hospital boards was associated with better performance on a time-sensitive quality measure for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI): Primary PCI [percutaneous intervention] Within 90 Minutes of Hospital Arrival.
In a survey, hospital chief quality officers were asked whether the following data were reported to the hospital governing board: ED wait times, the percentage of ED patients who left without being seen (LWBS), and the percentage of admitted ED patients who are boarded in the ED. Responses were paired with Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) data on the percentage of eligible AMI patients who received PCI within 90 minutes of arrival, which served as the hospitals' PCI score.
In the sample of 261 hospitals, 133 (51%) of hospital governing boards received data on wait times, 125 (48%) received data on LWBS, and 63 (24%) received data on ED boarding. After hospital characteristics were controlled for, hospitals that reported data on ED boarding to the governing board had PCI scores that were 5.5 percentage points higher (that is, better); p < .05. There was no association between reporting wait times or LWBS to the board and PCI scores.
Reporting data on the incidence of ED boarding to hospital governing boards was associated with better performance for PCI. More research is needed to explore the direction of this relationship, but the results suggest that hospitals should consider reporting data on ED boarding to their boards as a low/no-cost quality improvement activity.
医院管理委员会通过要求高级领导和管理人员负责,来影响医院提供的护理质量。开展了一项研究,以确定向医院管理委员会报告急诊科拥挤数据是否与急性心肌梗死(AMI)患者在一项对时间敏感的质量指标上的更好表现相关:患者入院后90分钟内进行主要经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)。
在一项调查中,询问医院首席质量官是否向医院管理委员会报告了以下数据:急诊科等待时间、未就诊离开急诊科(LWBS)的患者百分比,以及在急诊科候诊的已收治急诊科患者百分比。将这些回答与医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)关于符合条件的AMI患者在到达后90分钟内接受PCI的百分比的数据进行配对,该数据用作医院的PCI评分。
在261家医院的样本中,133家(51%)医院管理委员会收到了等待时间数据,125家(48%)收到了LWBS数据,63家(24%)收到了急诊科候诊数据。在控制了医院特征后,向管理委员会报告急诊科候诊数据的医院的PCI评分高出5.5个百分点(即更好);p<0.05。向管理委员会报告等待时间或LWBS与PCI评分之间没有关联。
向医院管理委员会报告急诊科候诊发生率的数据与PCI的更好表现相关。需要更多研究来探索这种关系的方向,但结果表明,医院应考虑将急诊科候诊数据报告给其管理委员会,作为一项低成本/无成本的质量改进活动。