Department of Clinical Science and Education, Södersjukhuset, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
PLoS One. 2019 Jul 18;14(7):e0220011. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0220011. eCollection 2019.
To compare two strategies, interprofessional teams versus fast track streaming, for orthopedic patients with limb injuries or back pain, the most frequent orthopedic complaints in an emergency department.
An observational before-and-after study at an adult emergency department from May 2012 to Nov 2015. Patients who arrived on weekdays from 8 am to 9 pm and presented limb injury or back pain during one year of each process were included, so that 11,573 orthopedic presentations were included in the fast track period and 10,978 in the teamwork period. Similarly, another 11,020 and 10,760 arrivals presenting the six most frequent non-orthopedic complaints were included in the respective periods, altogether 44,331 arrivals. The outcome measures were the time to physician (TTP) and length of stay (LOS). The LOS was adjusted for predictors, including imaging times, by using linear regression analysis.
The overall median TTP was shorter in the teamwork period, 76.3 min versus 121.0 min in the fast track period (-44.7 min, 95% confidence interval (CI): -47.3 to -42.6). The crude median LOS for orthopedic presentations was also shorter in the teamwork period, 217.0 min versus 230.0 min (-13.0 min, 95% CI: -18.0 to -8.0), and the adjusted LOS was 22.8 min shorter (95% CI: -26.9 to -18.7). For non-orthopedic presentations, the crude median LOS did not differ significantly between the periods (2.0 min, 95% CI: -3.0 to 7.0). However, the adjusted LOS was shorter in the teamwork period (-20.1 min, 95% CI: -24.6 to -15.7).
The median TTP and LOS for orthopedic presentations were shorter in the teamwork period. For non-orthopedic presentations, the TTP and adjusted LOS were also shorter in the teamwork period. Therefore, interprofessional teamwork may be an alternative approach to improve the patient flow in emergency departments.
比较两种策略,即多专业团队与快速通道分流,用于治疗骨科中最常见的四肢损伤或背痛急症患者。
这是一项在成人急诊部进行的观察性前后对照研究,研究时间为 2012 年 5 月至 2015 年 11 月。纳入在每个阶段工作日 8 点至 9 点期间到达且有四肢损伤或背痛的患者,因此在快速通道阶段纳入 11573 例骨科就诊者,在多专业团队阶段纳入 10978 例。同样,分别在两个阶段纳入另外 11020 例和 10760 例出现最常见的六种非骨科急症的就诊者,共纳入 44331 例就诊者。主要结局指标是医生接诊时间(TTP)和住院时间(LOS)。采用线性回归分析对 LOS 进行调整,包括影像学时间在内的预测因子。
多专业团队阶段的总体 TTP 中位数更短,为 76.3 分钟,而快速通道阶段为 121.0 分钟(-44.7 分钟,95%置信区间(CI):-47.3 至-42.6)。多专业团队阶段的骨科就诊者 LOS 中位数也更短,为 217.0 分钟,而快速通道阶段为 230.0 分钟(-13.0 分钟,95% CI:-18.0 至-8.0),调整后的 LOS 短 22.8 分钟(95% CI:-26.9 至-18.7)。而非骨科就诊者的 LOS 在两个阶段之间无显著差异(2.0 分钟,95% CI:-3.0 至 7.0)。然而,多专业团队阶段的调整后 LOS 更短(-20.1 分钟,95% CI:-24.6 至-15.7)。
多专业团队阶段的骨科就诊者 TTP 和 LOS 中位数更短。对于非骨科就诊者,TTP 和调整后的 LOS 也更短。因此,多专业团队合作可能是改善急诊科患者流程的一种替代方法。