Natasha V.D.V. Ratnaraja , Angharad P. Davies , Harriet Hughes , Clinical Services Committee working group on tools
{"title":"优化英国感染服务临床咨询活动的工具","authors":"Natasha V.D.V. Ratnaraja , Angharad P. Davies , Harriet Hughes , Clinical Services Committee working group on tools","doi":"10.1016/j.clinpr.2024.100378","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Demands on infection services have significantly increased over recent years, covering a diverse and broad range of clinical activities (Lawrence et al, 2021). This has not been accompanied by a corresponding increase in resources. The term Infection Specialist equally covers a broad and diverse range of specialities, and what is defined as one type of clinical infection review/consult may differ between infection specialists and infection services. This has also made it difficult to accurately capture clinical activity. Documentation of clinical activity may also be challenging, and also prevent accurate capture of the amount and type of activity being undertaken.</p><p>This document aims to provide a standardised description of the different types of clinical infection reviews. It aims to guide referrers to the minimum information required to optimise each type of review, to optimise the consultation. There are also suggested tools which may help infection services document and capture their clinical activity.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":33837,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Infection in Practice","volume":"24 ","pages":"Article 100378"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590170224000384/pdfft?md5=c106d4b84371233ae7ba40f7946212d4&pid=1-s2.0-S2590170224000384-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tools for optimising clinical consultation activity in infection services in the United Kingdom\",\"authors\":\"Natasha V.D.V. Ratnaraja , Angharad P. Davies , Harriet Hughes , Clinical Services Committee working group on tools\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.clinpr.2024.100378\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Demands on infection services have significantly increased over recent years, covering a diverse and broad range of clinical activities (Lawrence et al, 2021). This has not been accompanied by a corresponding increase in resources. The term Infection Specialist equally covers a broad and diverse range of specialities, and what is defined as one type of clinical infection review/consult may differ between infection specialists and infection services. This has also made it difficult to accurately capture clinical activity. Documentation of clinical activity may also be challenging, and also prevent accurate capture of the amount and type of activity being undertaken.</p><p>This document aims to provide a standardised description of the different types of clinical infection reviews. It aims to guide referrers to the minimum information required to optimise each type of review, to optimise the consultation. There are also suggested tools which may help infection services document and capture their clinical activity.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":33837,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Infection in Practice\",\"volume\":\"24 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100378\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590170224000384/pdfft?md5=c106d4b84371233ae7ba40f7946212d4&pid=1-s2.0-S2590170224000384-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Infection in Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590170224000384\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Infection in Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590170224000384","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Tools for optimising clinical consultation activity in infection services in the United Kingdom
Demands on infection services have significantly increased over recent years, covering a diverse and broad range of clinical activities (Lawrence et al, 2021). This has not been accompanied by a corresponding increase in resources. The term Infection Specialist equally covers a broad and diverse range of specialities, and what is defined as one type of clinical infection review/consult may differ between infection specialists and infection services. This has also made it difficult to accurately capture clinical activity. Documentation of clinical activity may also be challenging, and also prevent accurate capture of the amount and type of activity being undertaken.
This document aims to provide a standardised description of the different types of clinical infection reviews. It aims to guide referrers to the minimum information required to optimise each type of review, to optimise the consultation. There are also suggested tools which may help infection services document and capture their clinical activity.