PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Fidela S J Blank

Publications and source records attributed to Fidela S J Blank.

8 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Strategies used by nurses to recover medical errors in an academic emergency department setting.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to gain insight into how nurses recover medical errors in the emergency department (ED) setting. METHODS: The research method was of exploratory descriptive design with qualitative analysis. Subjects who signed the informed consent participated in one of four focus groups centering on nurse's role in recovering errors. Questions were asked during the focus groups to elicit information regarding nurse's role in the three phases of error recovery, namely, identifying, interrupting, and correcting the error. RESULTS: Five themes emerged to describe methods used by nurses to identify errors in the ED setting. These themes included: surveillance, anticipation, double checking, awareness of the "big picture," and experiential "knowing." Five themes emerged as methods used to interrupt errors: patient advocacy, offer of assistance, clarification, verbal interruption, and creation of delay. The themes for correcting an error were assembling the team and involving leadership. CONCLUSION: The results of this study provide preliminary evidence of the strategies used by ED nurses in the recovery of medical error. Further research is needed to generalize these findings to other ED settings. Knowledge of effective recovery strategies can ultimately be used to develop interventions for reducing medical error and improving patient safety.

Adaptation, Psychological↗
PubMed2006

Testing a classification model for emergency department errors.

AIM: This paper presents an evaluation of the Eindhoven Classification Model for categorizing healthcare errors. BACKGROUND: The ability to decrease healthcare errors will depend on an understanding of the types and patterns of error that occur in various settings. Research addressing the systematic classification of error is in its infancy. METHODS: The sample for this study was two existing sets of healthcare error reports obtained from the emergency department of a regional trauma center. Study data were collected in the summer of 2001 and 2002. The errors in these reports were categorized using a coding tool based on the Eindhoven Classification Model. In addition to testing for inter-rater reliability, the classification model was also evaluated for the number of unclassifiable errors and of categories never selected by the raters (not useful to the error classification model). RESULTS: Our findings of poor inter-rater reliability, large numbers of unclassifiable errors and categories not selected, suggest that the Eindhoven Classification Model, in its current form, cannot be applied to categorizing healthcare errors in an emergency department setting. CONCLUSIONS: Further study is needed to develop and test error categorization models for use in emergency departments and other healthcare settings.

Causality↗
PubMed2005

A descriptive study of heavy emergency department users at an academic emergency department reveals heavy ED users have better access to care than average users.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency department (ED) overcrowding has been a significant problem for the last 10 years. Several studies have shown that a relatively small number of ED patients are responsible for a disproportionate amount of ED visits. This study aims to describe the frequent users of our emergency department. METHODS: This was an institutional review board-approved descriptive study performed by a retrospective review of electronic records. This pilot describes and compares patients who had 12 or more ED visits during the study year with those who visited less. RESULTS: The 234 patients who met criteria for high-frequency use (HFU) of the emergency department were responsible for a total of 4633 visits. Sex, race, and age distribution of HFU patients were similar to those of general ED patients. Eighty-four percent of HF users have insurance and 93% have primary care providers. A relatively small percentage of HFU visits, 4%, were mental health-related visits and 3% were alcohol- and drug-related visits. The HFU visits are socially connected: 93% have their own homes; 94% have relatives or friends; 73% have a religious affiliation. Pain or pain-related conditions are the most common diagnoses. These patients are also frequent users of ambulatory care services. CONCLUSION: The similarities between our HFU and the general ED population are more numerous than their differences. The HFU patients of our emergency department are different in terms of age, employment status, and type of insurance. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSES: A detailed description of local HFU may help to inform planning and better meet ED patients' needs. As one of many results of this study, the ED chairman met with the Hematology-Oncology team and reviewed the protocol for ED management of sickle cell crisis. The meeting resulted in a revised protocol, including an immediate change in their pain medication from meperidine to either morphine or hydromorphone.

Academic Medical Centers↗
PubMed2003

How reliable are pain scores? A pilot study of 20 healthy volunteers.

INTRODUCTION: Pain scales such as the 100-MM Visual Analog Scale and the 10-point Numeric Rating Scale are used to describe pain intensity. The Visual Analog Scale and the Numeric Rating Scale provide accurate descriptors for a patient's perceived level of pain. But how accurate or reliable is a patient's perception of pain? METHODS: To test the relationship between the intensity of the pain stimulus and pain perception, we devised an experiment using a convenience sample of 20 healthy adult volunteers. A cutaneous nerve stimulator delivered a series of shocks of increasing intensity to the individual via a pediatric EKG electrode. The participants indicated their threshold for "intolerable pain." With use of this same level of stimulus in subsequent shocks, the participants, blinded to the amount of stimulus, were then asked to rate each shock as either "the same," "a little less," or "a little more" than the baseline stimulus. They then recorded their VAS score for each stimulus. RESULTS: "Intolerable pain" varied widely between 8 mm to 73 mm; likewise, the level of stimulus that produced this pain ranged from 4 to 9. Once a person's threshold of "intolerable pain" had been reached, 49% of the subsequent shocks were perceived as different, even though the stimulus was exactly the same. DISCUSSION: This experiment showed that (1) given the same intensity of pain stimulus, different persons have different perceptions of pain; and (2) the same intensity of pain stimulus, given to the same person repeatedly, does not result in the same self-report of pain intensity.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Evaluation of an educational video for cardiac patients.

Prehospital delay is a major problem in the management of patients with acute cardiac ischemia. The authors created a patient teaching program consisting of an educational video and written instructions designed to reduce prehospital delays in patients with chest pain. Patients who received standard discharge instructions served as the control group, whereas those who received the new patient teaching in addition to standard discharge instructions served as the intervention group. Of the 500 enrolled, 19% were rehospitalized within 1 year. Analysis of rehospitalizations showed no significant difference between the two groups on the three outcome variables: percentage who presented within thefirst hour of pain, use of ambulance, and time from anginal onset to emergency department arrival. In a comparison of the index hospitalization to the rehospitalization, there was a significant increase in the use of ambulances for the intervention group, p = .03, but not for the control group.

Ambulances↗