实施AMI READMITS风险评估评分以增加I型心肌梗死患者的转诊

Muganlinskaya
{"title":"实施AMI READMITS风险评估评分以增加I型心肌梗死患者的转诊","authors":"Muganlinskaya","doi":"10.12788/JCOM.0043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Assessing the risk characteristics of patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) can help providers make appropriate referral decisions. This quality improvement project sought to improve timely, appropriate referrals among patients with type I MI by adding a risk assessment, the AMI READMITS score, to the existing referral protocol. Methods: Patients’ chart data were analyzed to assess changes in referrals and timely follow-up appointments from pre-intervention to intervention. A survey assessed providers’ satisfaction with the new referral protocol. Results: Among 57 patients (n = 29 preintervention; n = 28 intervention), documented referrals increased significantly from 66% to 89% (χ2 = 4.571, df = 1, P = 0.033); and timely appointments increased by 10%, which was not significant (χ2 = 3.550, df = 2, P = 0.169). Most providers agreed that the new protocol was easy to use, useful in making referral decisions, and improved the referral process. All agreed the risk score should be incorporated into electronic clinical notes. Provider opinions related to implementing the risk score in clinical practice were mixed. Qualitative feedback suggests this was due to limited validation of the AMI READMITS score in reducing readmissions. Conclusions: Our risk-based referral protocol helped to increase appropriate referrals among patients with type I MI. Provider adoption may be enhanced by incorporating the protocol into electronic clinical notes. Research to further validate the accuracy of the AMI READMITS score in predicting readmissions may support adoption of the protocol in clinical practice.","PeriodicalId":15393,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implementing the AMI READMITS Risk Assessment Score to Increase Referrals Among Patients With Type I Myocardial Infarction\",\"authors\":\"Muganlinskaya\",\"doi\":\"10.12788/JCOM.0043\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: Assessing the risk characteristics of patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) can help providers make appropriate referral decisions. This quality improvement project sought to improve timely, appropriate referrals among patients with type I MI by adding a risk assessment, the AMI READMITS score, to the existing referral protocol. Methods: Patients’ chart data were analyzed to assess changes in referrals and timely follow-up appointments from pre-intervention to intervention. A survey assessed providers’ satisfaction with the new referral protocol. Results: Among 57 patients (n = 29 preintervention; n = 28 intervention), documented referrals increased significantly from 66% to 89% (χ2 = 4.571, df = 1, P = 0.033); and timely appointments increased by 10%, which was not significant (χ2 = 3.550, df = 2, P = 0.169). Most providers agreed that the new protocol was easy to use, useful in making referral decisions, and improved the referral process. All agreed the risk score should be incorporated into electronic clinical notes. Provider opinions related to implementing the risk score in clinical practice were mixed. Qualitative feedback suggests this was due to limited validation of the AMI READMITS score in reducing readmissions. Conclusions: Our risk-based referral protocol helped to increase appropriate referrals among patients with type I MI. Provider adoption may be enhanced by incorporating the protocol into electronic clinical notes. Research to further validate the accuracy of the AMI READMITS score in predicting readmissions may support adoption of the protocol in clinical practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":15393,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12788/JCOM.0043\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12788/JCOM.0043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评估急性心肌梗死(MI)患者的风险特征可以帮助提供者做出适当的转诊决定。该质量改进项目旨在通过在现有的转诊方案中添加风险评估,即AMI READMITS评分,来改善I型MI患者的及时、适当的转诊。方法:分析患者图表数据,以评估从干预前到干预期间转诊和及时随访预约的变化。一项调查评估了提供者对新转诊协议的满意度。结果:在57例患者中(干预前29例;干预前28例),记录的转诊率从66%显著增加到89%(χ2=4.571,df=1,P=0.033);及时预约增加了10%,这并不显著(χ2=3.550,df=2,P=0.169)。大多数提供者都认为新方案易于使用,有助于做出转诊决策,并改进了转诊过程。所有同意的风险评分应纳入电子临床记录中。提供者对在临床实践中实施风险评分的意见不一。定性反馈表明,这是由于AMI READMITS评分在减少再次入院方面的验证有限。结论:我们基于风险的转诊方案有助于增加I型心肌梗死患者的适当转诊。通过将该方案纳入电子临床记录,可以提高提供者的采用率。进一步验证AMI READMITS评分预测再次入院的准确性的研究可能支持在临床实践中采用该方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Implementing the AMI READMITS Risk Assessment Score to Increase Referrals Among Patients With Type I Myocardial Infarction
Objective: Assessing the risk characteristics of patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) can help providers make appropriate referral decisions. This quality improvement project sought to improve timely, appropriate referrals among patients with type I MI by adding a risk assessment, the AMI READMITS score, to the existing referral protocol. Methods: Patients’ chart data were analyzed to assess changes in referrals and timely follow-up appointments from pre-intervention to intervention. A survey assessed providers’ satisfaction with the new referral protocol. Results: Among 57 patients (n = 29 preintervention; n = 28 intervention), documented referrals increased significantly from 66% to 89% (χ2 = 4.571, df = 1, P = 0.033); and timely appointments increased by 10%, which was not significant (χ2 = 3.550, df = 2, P = 0.169). Most providers agreed that the new protocol was easy to use, useful in making referral decisions, and improved the referral process. All agreed the risk score should be incorporated into electronic clinical notes. Provider opinions related to implementing the risk score in clinical practice were mixed. Qualitative feedback suggests this was due to limited validation of the AMI READMITS score in reducing readmissions. Conclusions: Our risk-based referral protocol helped to increase appropriate referrals among patients with type I MI. Provider adoption may be enhanced by incorporating the protocol into electronic clinical notes. Research to further validate the accuracy of the AMI READMITS score in predicting readmissions may support adoption of the protocol in clinical practice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Glucagon Prescription Rates for Individuals With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus Following Implementation of an Electronic Health Records Intervention Quality Improvement in Health Care: From Conceptual Frameworks and Definitions to Implementation The Hospitalist Triage Role for Reducing Admission Delays: Impacts on Throughput, Quality, Interprofessional Practice, and Clinician Experience of Care Redesign of Health Care Systems to Reduce Diagnostic Errors: Leveraging Human Experience and Artificial Intelligence Patient Safety in Transitions of Care: Addressing Discharge Communication Gaps and the Potential of the Teach-Back Method
×
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