ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic created an urgent need for high-quality rapid research. One clinical challenge was how to minimise the risk of transmission in the hospital setting. The CLEAN study conducted a rapid evaluation of the potential utility of a spray-based disinfectant in a hospital setting. The study was undertaken between December 2020 and March 2021 and involved the implementation of the spray in 10 different clinical areas in one UK teaching hospital. A mixed-methods approach was adopted (including observations, surveys, and qualitative interviews) informed by the theories for understanding the implementation of new healthcare technologies. The evaluation found that while the spray had a number of perceived benefits when added to existing disinfection processes, other factors limited its potential utility. These findings informed a number of recommendations for future adoption within hospital settings. This paper describes and reflects on the rapid methodology that allowed us to undertake the study and deliver results in a short space of time. We experienced a number of pressures during set-up and fieldwork due to the challenging conditions caused by the pandemic, and the methodological approach had to evolve throughout the study because of the changing clinical context. The involvement of clinicians from the research setting as full members of the research team was key to the rapid delivery of the research. They provided an essential link to the implementation environment, and their experiential knowledge of the setting added an important perspective to the analysis. Balancing their involvement with their clinical roles was challenging, however, as was coordinating a large and diverse team of interviewers in such a short space of time. Overall, the study highlighted the value of rapid research to inform urgent healthcare decisions in a pandemic. Although our experience suggests that conducting such research requires some practical and methodological trade-offs, we found that there were also numerous benefits of using rapid methods and identified various opportunities to ensure their robustness.
ABSTRACT
Background Since the publication of the Emergency General Surgery Commissioning Guide by ASGBI in 2014, there has been a drive to develop ambulatory pathways for acute surgical patients, saving inpatient stays and reducing the risk of hospital-acquired infections. Many units, like ours, had a large workload increased by seeing next day returns as well as acute presentations. In October 2020 an Institute of Emergency General Surgery was formed who developed an ambulatory pathway to ameliorate some of these issues and provide a point of contact for primary care referrals, for one the busiest emergency general surgical takes in the UK. Methods A retrospective analysis was undertaken to identify all acute referrals to general surgery over a 14-day period in February 2019 prior to (Pre-ASC) and 2021 after (Post-ASC) the introduction of an Ambulatory Surgical Clinic (ASC). All patient episodes were reviewed, and descriptive statistics on overall attendance to the surgical assessment unit (SAU), admissions to inpatient wards and referrals to ASC were analysed. Patients presenting to the acute urology take were used as a control to compare the number patients attending the surgical assessment unit both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results 830 patients presented over the 28-day study period (426 pre-ACS vs 404 post-ACS;5% reduction), totalling 992 patient encounters including planned returns (525 vs 467;11% reduction). After the introduction of the ASC total attendance to SAU was reduced by 42% (525 vs 306);next day return attendances were reduced by 87% (99 vs 13) and attendances from primary care were reduced by 68% (208 vs 67). The proportion of patients admitted was similar (46% vs 50%). 146 patients attended the ASC, and 15 patients received telephone advice alone. The control group saw attendance increase by 25% (178 vs 223). Conclusions The results clearly show that the introduction of the ASC has decreased attendance to SAU, freeing clinicians to dedicate more time to those acutely unwell. The similar proportion of admissions after the introduction of the ASC suggests that the ambulatory pathway correctly identifies those who are well enough to be managed as outpatients. The increased attendance in the control group suggests that the data were not the results of a decrease in referrals due to COVID-19. The results shared here should encourage other large units to consider developing ambulatory pathways.