Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to J Wardrope.
This last article in the series focuses on the impact of a major incident in the emergency department, leadership qualities, and summarises the topics discussed in the previous papers.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
AIMS: To compare the clinical effectiveness and costs of minor injury services provided by nurse practitioners with minor injury care provided by an accident and emergency (A&E) department. METHODS: A three part prospective study in a city where an A&E department was closing and being replaced by a nurse led minor injury unit (MIU). The first part of the study took a sample of patients attending the A&E department. The second part of the study was a sample of patients from a nurse led MIU that had replaced the A&E department. In each of these samples the clinical effectiveness was judged by comparing the "gold standard" of a research assessment with the clinical assessment. Primary outcome measures were the number of errors in clinical assessment, treatment, and disposal. The third part of the study used routine data whose collection had been prospectively configured to assess the costs and cost consequences of both models of care. RESULTS: The minor injury unit produced a safe service where the total package of care was equal to or in some cases better than the A&E care. Significant process errors were made in 191 of 1447 (13.2%) patients treated by medical staff in the A&E department and 126 of 1313 (9.6%) of patients treated by nurse practitioners in the MIU. Very significant errors were rare (one error). Waiting times were much better at the MIU (mean MIU 19 minutes, A&E department 56.4 minutes). The revenue costs were greater in the MIU (MIU pound 41.1, A&E department pound 40.01) and there was a great difference in the rates of follow up and with the nurses referring 47% of patients for follow up and the A&E department referring only 27%. Thus the costs and cost consequences were greater for MIU care compared with A&E care (MIU pound 12.7 per minor injury case, A&E department pound 9.66 per minor injury case). CONCLUSION: A nurse practitioner minor injury service can provide a safe and effective service for the treatment of minor injury. However, the costs of such a service are greater and there seems to be an increased use of outpatient services.
INTRODUCTION: The Department of Health document Reforming emergency care stated that new initiatives need to be developed to improve the care and assessment of patients. The Audit Commission has suggested that ambulance services should be allowed to decide who should be sent to each type of emergency and treat some patients at home. AIMS: This scheme explores a new way of providing clinical assessment of older patients in their homes or in care homes within Sheffield. It sets out to provide a very patient centred model of care by providing community based clinical assessment for patients presenting to the emergency services with minor acute conditions. Scope, development, and structure of scheme: The scheme trains paramedic practitioners in the assessment and treatment of minor conditions to emergency nurse practitioner level. It consists of a three week full time theory based course and a 45 day period of supervised clinical practice based in the emergency department, minor injury unit, care of the elderly falls clinic, and with community services. Subsequently, the competence of the practitioners is assessed. Service delivery: The service will be activated by a 999 call between 0800 to 2000 each day. It is anticipated that between 25% to 50% of patients eligible to receive the service will be assessed and treated within the home. This approach to providing emergency care is untested and the frequency of use, patient acceptability, safety, and cost effectiveness are unknown, therefore rigorous assessment is essential through a randomised controlled trial.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of post-trauma psychological problems among a cohort of male accident and emergency department patients admitted to hospital. To identify the changes in their psychological symptoms over an 18 month follow up period. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of male accident and emergency department patients who were admitted for treatment of an injury. Baseline interview recorded demographic details and accident details. Standardised questionnaires measured baseline psychological state and personality type. Follow up at six weeks, six months, and 18 months after injury was by face to face interview or postal questionnaire and recorded progress since injury, and documented psychological status through the use of standardised questionnaires to detect psychiatric disorder and symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). RESULTS: 210 male patients were recruited into the study. Psychiatric disorder was identified in 47.6% of responders at six weeks, and 43.4% at six months after injury. This improved significantly at 18 months. PTSD symptoms were moderate in 25%-30% and severe in 5%-14% and did not change significantly over the study period. A significant relation was found between previous psychiatric history and psychological symptoms at 18 months after injury. No relation was identified between injury severity and psychological status after injury. CONCLUSION: This study finds a high prevalence of psychological distress in male accident and emergency department patients after injury. Although some symptoms resolve over the follow up period, a proportion remain and may be related to previous psychiatric history. There was no relation identified between severity of injury and psychological morbidity.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Management is part of everyday life in emergency care. This project will hopefully bring alive management issues, give a "real" framework to assist the discussion of management theory and hopefully to entertain. We look forward to your feedback on the tasks and welcome ideas on how the St Jude's should go forward.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of centralisation of accident and emergency (A&E) services in a large urban setting. The end points were the quality of patient care judged by time to see a doctor or nurse practitioner, time to admission and the cost of the A&E service as a whole. METHODS: Sheffield is a large industrial city with a population of 471000. In 1994 Sheffield health authority took a decision to centralise a number of services including the A&E services. This study presents data collected over a three year period before, during and after the centralisation of adult A&E services from two sites to one site and the centralisation of children's A&E services to a separate site. A minor injury unit was also established along with an emergency admissions unit. The study used information from the A&E departments' computer system and routinely available financial data. RESULTS: There has been a small decrease in the number of new patient attendances using the Sheffield A&E system. Most patients go to the correct department. The numbers of acute admissions through the adult A&E have doubled. Measures of process efficiency show some improvement in times to admission. There has been measurable deterioration in the time to be seen for minor injuries in the A&E departments. This is partly offset by the very good waiting time to be seen in the minor injuries unit. The costs of providing the service within Sheffield have increased. CONCLUSION: Centralisation of A&E services in Sheffield has led to concentration of the most ill patients in a single adult department and separate paediatric A&E department. Despite a greatly increased number of admissions at the adult site this change has not resulted in increased waiting times for admission because of the transfer of adequate beds to support the changes. There has however been a deterioration in the time to see a clinician, especially in the A&E departments. The waiting times at the minor injury unit are very short.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.