Hyperglycemia grand rounds: descriptive findings of outcomes from a continuing education intervention to improve glycemic control and prevent hypoglycemia in the hospital setting

E. Moghissi, S. Inzucchi, K. Mann, Boyce Byerly, Laurie Ermentrout, J. J. Juchniewicz, Jocelyn H Ferareza, Natalie Kirkwood
{"title":"Hyperglycemia grand rounds: descriptive findings of outcomes from a continuing education intervention to improve glycemic control and prevent hypoglycemia in the hospital setting","authors":"E. Moghissi, S. Inzucchi, K. Mann, Boyce Byerly, Laurie Ermentrout, J. J. Juchniewicz, Jocelyn H Ferareza, Natalie Kirkwood","doi":"10.1080/21548331.2015.1103191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hyperglycemia is common in the hospital in-patient setting and is associated with adverse outcomes. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) often fail to use best practices established to manage this condition or to coordinate care among team members. Objectives: The objective of the Hyperglycemia Grand Rounds (HGR) continuing education initiative was to improve knowledge levels in a team setting, leading to improved clinical competence, evidence-based behaviors, and improved patient care. Methods: To achieve that goal, a four-module seminar series was presented to HCPs on-site in a “Grand Rounds” format at healthcare institutions across the United States. Outcomes data included satisfaction, learning, impact, and intent-to-implement measures at event time and at follow-up. At the site level, detailed questionnaires assessed skill gaps and expected outcomes from administrators at the time the modules were scheduled and the impact after modules were completed. Demographic information allowed identification of HCPs receiving maximum benefits; data on barriers to implementation are reported. Results: Seventy-eight percent of participants self-reported a positive impact on competence, performance, or patient outcomes. Forty percent of learners said they intended to make specific changes in practices. Eighty-two percent of administrators confirmed expected changes in their health system. The follow-up study concurred with the initial findings. Conclusion: The HGR was an effective program in improving self-reported competence amongst attendees that could potentially lead to improved care. This descriptive report summarizes outcomes from 1 year of educational efforts to more than 2000 healthcare professionals.","PeriodicalId":75913,"journal":{"name":"Hospital practice","volume":"44 1","pages":"270 - 276"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21548331.2015.1103191","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hospital practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21548331.2015.1103191","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Hyperglycemia is common in the hospital in-patient setting and is associated with adverse outcomes. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) often fail to use best practices established to manage this condition or to coordinate care among team members. Objectives: The objective of the Hyperglycemia Grand Rounds (HGR) continuing education initiative was to improve knowledge levels in a team setting, leading to improved clinical competence, evidence-based behaviors, and improved patient care. Methods: To achieve that goal, a four-module seminar series was presented to HCPs on-site in a “Grand Rounds” format at healthcare institutions across the United States. Outcomes data included satisfaction, learning, impact, and intent-to-implement measures at event time and at follow-up. At the site level, detailed questionnaires assessed skill gaps and expected outcomes from administrators at the time the modules were scheduled and the impact after modules were completed. Demographic information allowed identification of HCPs receiving maximum benefits; data on barriers to implementation are reported. Results: Seventy-eight percent of participants self-reported a positive impact on competence, performance, or patient outcomes. Forty percent of learners said they intended to make specific changes in practices. Eighty-two percent of administrators confirmed expected changes in their health system. The follow-up study concurred with the initial findings. Conclusion: The HGR was an effective program in improving self-reported competence amongst attendees that could potentially lead to improved care. This descriptive report summarizes outcomes from 1 year of educational efforts to more than 2000 healthcare professionals.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
高血糖大查房:在医院环境中通过继续教育干预改善血糖控制和预防低血糖的描述性结果
高血糖症在医院住院病人中很常见,并与不良结局相关。医疗保健专业人员(hcp)经常不能使用为管理这种情况而建立的最佳实践或在团队成员之间协调护理。目的:高血糖大查房(HGR)继续教育倡议的目的是提高团队环境中的知识水平,从而提高临床能力,循证行为和改善患者护理。方法:为了实现这一目标,在美国各地的医疗机构以“大查房”的形式向HCPs现场介绍了四个模块的系列研讨会。结果数据包括满意度、学习、影响和在事件发生时和随访时实施措施的意图。在现场层面,详细的调查问卷评估了技能差距和管理人员在计划模块时的预期结果,以及模块完成后的影响。人口统计信息有助于确定获得最大利益的卫生保健专业人员;报告了关于执行障碍的数据。结果:78%的参与者自我报告了对能力、表现或患者预后的积极影响。40%的学习者表示他们打算在实践中做出具体的改变。82%的管理人员确认了他们的医疗系统的预期变化。后续研究与最初的发现一致。结论:HGR是一个有效的项目,可以提高参会者自我报告的能力,从而有可能改善护理。这份描述性报告总结了对2000多名医疗保健专业人员1年教育努力的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Benign acute myositis in an adult: case-based review. Hospitalists' COVID-19 management roles in hospitals without infectious disease specialists. Cardiac rehabilitation. Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 variants B.1.617: host tropism, proteolytic activation, cell-cell fusion, and neutralization sensitivity. How could perioperative anxiety be addressed via surgical team communication approaches? Findings from a scoping review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1