Cargando…

The Value of a Surgical Assessment Unit Ultrasound Facility

Ultrasound scan (USS) is a common and important mode of investigation for emergency surgical admissions. Delay in investigation often leads to delayed diagnosis and treatment, and possible extended length of stay (LOS), which has clinical, cost and service provision implications. We aim to investiga...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lai, Wesley, Gutteridge, Catherine, Regan, Alicia, Lambert, Anthony
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: British Publishing Group 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5411714/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28469898
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjquality.u209155.w3729
_version_ 1783232852875280384
author Lai, Wesley
Gutteridge, Catherine
Regan, Alicia
Lambert, Anthony
author_facet Lai, Wesley
Gutteridge, Catherine
Regan, Alicia
Lambert, Anthony
author_sort Lai, Wesley
collection PubMed
description Ultrasound scan (USS) is a common and important mode of investigation for emergency surgical admissions. Delay in investigation often leads to delayed diagnosis and treatment, and possible extended length of stay (LOS), which has clinical, cost and service provision implications. We aim to investigate the clinical impact on patient care and the cost-effectiveness of a pilot Surgical Assessment Unit (SAU) USS facility. We performed a retrospective data collection on 100 consecutive SAU inpatients who had an USS investigation on the ward since the introduction of the facility, matched by 100 consecutive SAU inpatients who had an USS in the radiology department before the pilot study. Results of the audit show SAU USS has a reduced mean LOS by 1.44 days compared to departmental USS, and led to more same day discharge than departmental USS (20 vs. 5), thus avoiding unnecessary overnight stay. It also significantly reduced mean waiting time from admission to investigation by 5.21 hours, which can be translated into improved patient and staff satisfaction. All these findings are both statistically and clinically significant. The estimated cost of each SAU USS is comparable to the average departmental USS (£29.71 vs. £30.80). Using the average cost of an excess bed day = £273, SAU USS has produced an estimated saving of £394.72/patient. This does not include saved opportunistic costs such as prevented elective operation cancellations, fines incurred from surgery waiting time/A+E breaches etc. To conclude SAU USS has a significant positive impact on patient care in surgical admissions by reducing LOS and investigation waiting time, as well as facilitating same day discharge.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5411714
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher British Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54117142017-05-03 The Value of a Surgical Assessment Unit Ultrasound Facility Lai, Wesley Gutteridge, Catherine Regan, Alicia Lambert, Anthony BMJ Qual Improv Rep BMJ Quality Improvement Programme Ultrasound scan (USS) is a common and important mode of investigation for emergency surgical admissions. Delay in investigation often leads to delayed diagnosis and treatment, and possible extended length of stay (LOS), which has clinical, cost and service provision implications. We aim to investigate the clinical impact on patient care and the cost-effectiveness of a pilot Surgical Assessment Unit (SAU) USS facility. We performed a retrospective data collection on 100 consecutive SAU inpatients who had an USS investigation on the ward since the introduction of the facility, matched by 100 consecutive SAU inpatients who had an USS in the radiology department before the pilot study. Results of the audit show SAU USS has a reduced mean LOS by 1.44 days compared to departmental USS, and led to more same day discharge than departmental USS (20 vs. 5), thus avoiding unnecessary overnight stay. It also significantly reduced mean waiting time from admission to investigation by 5.21 hours, which can be translated into improved patient and staff satisfaction. All these findings are both statistically and clinically significant. The estimated cost of each SAU USS is comparable to the average departmental USS (£29.71 vs. £30.80). Using the average cost of an excess bed day = £273, SAU USS has produced an estimated saving of £394.72/patient. This does not include saved opportunistic costs such as prevented elective operation cancellations, fines incurred from surgery waiting time/A+E breaches etc. To conclude SAU USS has a significant positive impact on patient care in surgical admissions by reducing LOS and investigation waiting time, as well as facilitating same day discharge. British Publishing Group 2017-04-27 /pmc/articles/PMC5411714/ /pubmed/28469898 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjquality.u209155.w3729 Text en © 2017, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/legalcode
spellingShingle BMJ Quality Improvement Programme
Lai, Wesley
Gutteridge, Catherine
Regan, Alicia
Lambert, Anthony
The Value of a Surgical Assessment Unit Ultrasound Facility
title The Value of a Surgical Assessment Unit Ultrasound Facility
title_full The Value of a Surgical Assessment Unit Ultrasound Facility
title_fullStr The Value of a Surgical Assessment Unit Ultrasound Facility
title_full_unstemmed The Value of a Surgical Assessment Unit Ultrasound Facility
title_short The Value of a Surgical Assessment Unit Ultrasound Facility
title_sort value of a surgical assessment unit ultrasound facility
topic BMJ Quality Improvement Programme
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5411714/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28469898
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjquality.u209155.w3729
work_keys_str_mv AT laiwesley thevalueofasurgicalassessmentunitultrasoundfacility
AT gutteridgecatherine thevalueofasurgicalassessmentunitultrasoundfacility
AT reganalicia thevalueofasurgicalassessmentunitultrasoundfacility
AT lambertanthony thevalueofasurgicalassessmentunitultrasoundfacility
AT laiwesley valueofasurgicalassessmentunitultrasoundfacility
AT gutteridgecatherine valueofasurgicalassessmentunitultrasoundfacility
AT reganalicia valueofasurgicalassessmentunitultrasoundfacility
AT lambertanthony valueofasurgicalassessmentunitultrasoundfacility