Citations

Hyponatraemia on hospital admission is associated with increased length of stay, healthcare expenditures and mortality. Urine studies collected before fluid or diuretic administration are essential to diagnose the underlying cause of hyponatraemia, thereby empowering admitting teams to employ the appropriate treatment. A multidisciplinary quality improvement (QI) team led by internal medicine residents performed a QI project from July 2020 through June 2021 to increase the rate of urine studies collected before fluid or diuretic administration in the emergency department (ED) in patients admitted with moderate to severe hyponatraemia. We implemented two plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles to address this goal. In PDSA Cycle #1, we displayed an educational poster in employee areas of the ED and met with nursing staff at their monthly meetings to communicate the project and answer questions. We also obtained agreement from ED attending physicians and nursing leaders to support the project. In PDSA Cycle #2, we implemented a structural change in the nursing triage process to issue every patient who qualified for bloodwork with a urine specimen container labelled with a medical record number on registration so that the patient could provide a sample at any point, including while in the waiting area. After PDSA Cycle #1, urine specimen collection increased from 34.5% to 57.5%. After PDSA Cycle #2, this increased further to 59%. We conclude that a combination of educational and structural changes led to a significant increase in urine specimen collection before fluid or diuretic administration among patients presenting with moderate-to-severe hyponatraemia in the ED.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the factors affecting critical care capacity and how critical care organizations (CCOs) within academic centers in the U.S. flow-size critical care resources under normal operations, strain, and surge conditions. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, federal agency and American Hospital Association reports, and previous CCO survey results were reviewed. STUDY SELECTION: Studies and reports of critical care bed capacity and utilization within CCOs and in the United States were selected. DATA EXTRACTION: The Academic Leaders in the Critical Care Medicine Task Force established regular conference calls to reach a consensus on the approach of CCOs to “flow-sizing” critical care services. DATA SYNTHESIS: The approach of CCOs to “flow-sizing” critical care is outlined. The vertical (relation to institutional resources, e.g., space allocation, equipment, personnel redistribution) and horizontal (interdepartmental, e.g., emergency department, operating room, inpatient floors) integration of critical care delivery (ICUs, rapid response) for healthcare organizations and the methods by which CCOs flow-size critical care during normal operations, strain, and surge conditions are described. The advantages, barriers, and recommendations for the rapid and efficient scaling of critical care operations via a CCO structure are explained. Comprehensive guidance and resources for the development of “flow-sizing” capability by a CCO within a healthcare organization are provided. CONCLUSIONS: We identified and summarized the fundamental principles affecting critical care capacity. The taskforce highlighted the advantages of the CCO governance model to achieve rapid and cost-effective “flow-sizing” of critical care services and provide recommendations and resources to facilitate this capability. The relevance of a comprehensive approach to “flow-sizing” has become particularly relevant in the wake of the latest COVID-19 pandemic. In light of the growing risks of another extreme epidemic, planning for adequate capacity to confront the next critical care crisis is urgent.

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) has a high sensitivity for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC). In a symptomatic population FIT may identify those patients who require colorectal investigation with the highest priority. FIT offers considerable advantages over the use of symptoms alone, as an objective measure of risk with a vastly superior positive predictive value for CRC, while conversely identifying a truly low risk cohort of patients. The aim of this guideline was to provide a clear strategy for the use of FIT in the diagnostic pathway of people with signs or symptoms of a suspected diagnosis of CRC. The guideline was jointly developed by the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/British Society of Gastroenterology, specifically by a 21-member multidisciplinary guideline development group (GDG). A systematic review of 13 535 publications was undertaken to develop 23 evidence and expert opinion-based recommendations for the triage of people with symptoms of a suspected CRC diagnosis in primary care. In order to achieve consensus among a broad group of key stakeholders, we completed an extended Delphi of the GDG, and also 61 other individuals across the UK and Ireland, including by members of the public, charities and primary and secondary care. Seventeen research recommendations were also prioritised to inform clinical management.