Keller Christopher S, Dilger Christopher, Chou Shih-Chin, Lawal Rasheed, Jenks Shane
HCA Houston Healthcare Kingwood, Kingwood, TX.
HCA Healthc J Med. 2023 Aug 29;4(4):279-282. doi: 10.36518/2689-0216.1183. eCollection 2023.
Quality improvement (QI) is a major focus of all departments and fields of health care, including emergency medical services. The chaotic and rapidly evolving atmosphere in which paramedics must practice can lead to inconsistency between what is documented and the actual events. This leads to difficulty when trying to evaluate the practitioners and when implementing a QI program. In this study, we evaluated the prevalence of discrepancy between the video and written record for Rapid Sequence Intubation (RSI) performed in the field as a demonstration of the utility of video documentation in QI.
We used a systematic retrospective chart review to compare written with video documentation in 100 consecutive prehospital RSI encounters in a single EMS agency.
Of the patient care records (PCRs), only 6% matched the video record for all quality measures tracked. The largest reason for the discrepancy was in the time required to intubate (58%) whether LEMON was evaluated (42%), total number of intubation attempts (36%), first attempt success (24%), BVM used (18%), and whether an airway introducer device was used (12%).
Written documentation is inaccurate compared to video documentation when used as a quality improvement process for EMS prehospital RSI encounters.
质量改进(QI)是医疗保健所有部门和领域的主要关注点,包括紧急医疗服务。护理人员必须在其中执业的混乱且迅速变化的环境可能导致记录内容与实际事件之间存在不一致。这在试图评估从业者以及实施质量改进计划时会带来困难。在本研究中,我们评估了现场进行快速顺序插管(RSI)时视频记录与书面记录之间差异的发生率,以此证明视频记录在质量改进中的实用性。
我们采用系统的回顾性图表审查,对一家紧急医疗服务机构连续100例院前RSI病例的书面记录与视频记录进行比较。
在所有追踪的质量指标方面,仅6%的患者护理记录(PCR)与视频记录相符。差异的最大原因在于插管所需时间(58%),无论是否评估了LEMON(42%)、插管尝试总数(36%)、首次尝试成功率(24%)、是否使用了袋阀面罩(BVM)(18%)以及是否使用了气道导入装置(12%)。
当将书面记录用作紧急医疗服务院前RSI病例质量改进过程时,与视频记录相比不准确。