Rawan Narwal-Kasmani MD, FACP, Tamara J. Vaughan , Charla A. Ulrich DNP, MOD, CPHQ, CPPS, CIC, Julie M. Stausmire MSN, APRN, CNS-BC
{"title":"Performance improvement, telemedicine, patient engagement, and comparative no-show rates","authors":"Rawan Narwal-Kasmani MD, FACP, Tamara J. Vaughan , Charla A. Ulrich DNP, MOD, CPHQ, CPPS, CIC, Julie M. Stausmire MSN, APRN, CNS-BC","doi":"10.1002/jhrm.21543","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>No-show patient visits should be considered risk events. No-shows impact the quality and continuity of patient care. Missed visits increase health care risks by deferred or missed diagnosis and treatment, and increases costs of care. This performance improvement project proactively implemented a telemedicine system of care during a public health emergency (PHE). The goal was to improve health care access and decrease health care disparities despite emergency management changes in organizational staffing and federal stay-at-home orders. Telemedicine visits also addressed known causes of historically high in-person no-show office rates—lack of transportation, childcare issues, mobility issues, and adverse weather conditions. Despite location in a Hospital Census Tract where 50% of our population is below the Federal Poverty Level, with less access to technology, telemedicine proved to be successful. The Revised Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE 2.0) guidelines were the planning framework. The Model for Healthcare Improvement including Part 1 (AIM) and Part 2 (Plan-Do-Study-Act) was used to develop interventions, outcomes, and rationale for use. Data was collected from January 2020 thru March 2022, with 22,831 total scheduled visits (15,837 in-person, 6994 telemedicine). The average monthly no-show rate for in-person visits was 35% compared to 9% for telemedicine visits.</p>","PeriodicalId":39819,"journal":{"name":"Journal of healthcare risk management : the journal of the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management","volume":"43 1","pages":"9-17"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of healthcare risk management : the journal of the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jhrm.21543","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
No-show patient visits should be considered risk events. No-shows impact the quality and continuity of patient care. Missed visits increase health care risks by deferred or missed diagnosis and treatment, and increases costs of care. This performance improvement project proactively implemented a telemedicine system of care during a public health emergency (PHE). The goal was to improve health care access and decrease health care disparities despite emergency management changes in organizational staffing and federal stay-at-home orders. Telemedicine visits also addressed known causes of historically high in-person no-show office rates—lack of transportation, childcare issues, mobility issues, and adverse weather conditions. Despite location in a Hospital Census Tract where 50% of our population is below the Federal Poverty Level, with less access to technology, telemedicine proved to be successful. The Revised Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE 2.0) guidelines were the planning framework. The Model for Healthcare Improvement including Part 1 (AIM) and Part 2 (Plan-Do-Study-Act) was used to develop interventions, outcomes, and rationale for use. Data was collected from January 2020 thru March 2022, with 22,831 total scheduled visits (15,837 in-person, 6994 telemedicine). The average monthly no-show rate for in-person visits was 35% compared to 9% for telemedicine visits.
未就诊的患者就诊应视为风险事件。没有演出会影响患者护理的质量和连续性。错过就诊会因延误或错过诊断和治疗而增加医疗风险,并增加护理成本。该绩效改进项目在公共卫生紧急情况(PHE)期间积极实施了远程医疗护理系统。尽管组织人员配置和联邦居家令发生了紧急管理变化,但目标是改善医疗服务的可及性,减少医疗保健差距。远程医疗就诊还解决了已知的历史性高的无就诊率原因——缺乏交通、儿童保育问题、行动不便和恶劣的天气条件。尽管位于医院普查区,那里50%的人口低于联邦贫困水平,获得技术的机会较少,但远程医疗被证明是成功的。修订后的卓越质量改进报告标准(SQUIRE 2.0)指南是规划框架。医疗保健改进模型,包括第1部分(AIM)和第2部分(Plan Do Study Act),用于制定干预措施、结果和使用理由。数据收集于2020年1月至2022年3月,共有22831次计划就诊(15837次亲自就诊,6994次远程医疗)。面对面就诊的平均月无就诊率为35%,而远程医疗就诊为9%。
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Healthcare Risk Management is published quarterly by the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management (ASHRM). The purpose of the journal is to publish research, trends, and new developments in the field of healthcare risk management with the ultimate goal of advancing safe and trusted patient-centered healthcare delivery and promoting proactive and innovative management of organization-wide risk. The journal focuses on insightful, peer-reviewed content that relates to patient safety, emergency preparedness, insurance, legal, leadership, and other timely healthcare risk management issues.