ABSTRACT
Introduction: The global pandemic was an emerging challenge that significantly impacted healthcare systems and the delivery of care. Prompt actions and adaptive techniques, such as the virtual clinic, were implemented to ensure the quality and continuity of the care provided. The aim of this quality improvement project was to ensure the smooth implementation and effectiveness of the virtual clinic during the COVID-19 crisis. Methods: A specialized team of multidisciplinary healthcare providers was established to systematically ensure the implementation of the virtual clinic within the Department of Oncology. The team used multiple Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles of the quality improvement model to achieve the final goal and facilitate the transition to the virtual clinic. Results: A total of 29 weekly virtual clinic sessions were conducted, covering various oncology services. From March to December 2020, 81% of the scheduled patients (3888) responded to virtual clinic calls. Physicians initiated 234 unplanned virtual clinic calls to follow up on a patient's condition. In addition, 916 medications were shipped to patients as needed. A patient satisfaction survey in May 2020 indicated an overall satisfaction rate of 92% with the virtual clinic process. Staff satisfaction was also high (91%), and 88% of the physicians believed that the virtual clinic would continue beyond the pandemic. Conclusion: Implementing the virtual clinic is achievable through following systematic steps and effectively addressing emerging challenges as required. The concept of the virtual clinic was well accepted by patients and staff.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: The outpatient oncology infusion unit is very busy, serving 60 to 70 patients per day. Due to a limited number of nurses, treatment chairs, only one pharmacy hood for bio-hazardous drug preparation, and other factors, patients wait a long time before starting their treatment, which affects the patient experience negatively. We conducted a quality improvement project to reduce the waiting time before starting the treatment, improve the patients' experience, and allow the unit to work more effectively through better resource utilization and accommodating more patients. Methods: A committee was formed with representatives from oncology nursing and the quality specialist, chemotherapy pharmacy supervisor, data manager, and a medical consultant (team leader). We studied baseline data of patient waiting times from January to March 2019 and the factors that contributed to delays before starting the treatment. The charge nurse identified patients who could safely have their medication released early in the morning at 7 am, enabling the pharmacy to dispense at 8 am without their actual presence being required in the infusion suite (i.e., medication early release program or MERP). Multiple plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles were implemented to achieve a wait time from check-in to medication administration of less than 60 minutes. Data collected included check-in time, chair time, vital signs time, administration time, and discharge time. Additionally, reasons for drug wastage were assessed for patients who did not receive the prepared medication. A patient satisfaction survey was conducted with the patients before and after being enrolled in the program. Results: At baseline, average waiting time for patients receiving similar medications in the MERP was 2 hours and 27 minutes. After the first intervention, average waiting time was reduced to 1 hour and 24 minutes, and small improvements were observed after each PDSA cycl. A major breakthrough occurred after an intensive patient education program and enforcement of strict compliance with the criteria in selecting the patients appropriate for theMERP. Average waiting time wasreduced to ≤ 60 minutes, and in November 2022, it was 30 minutes on average. Drug wastage was identified as a balancing measure. We were successful in reducing drug wastage by implementing several changes and patient education measures and achieved zero wastage. The patient satisfaction survey showed better satisfaction with the new changes. Conclusion: A positive impact was achieved in this quality improvement project, with a significant reduction in the average waiting time for patients to start receiving chemotherapy. The outcome of this project has been maintained for 4 years and is still ongoing.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Although ultrasound-guided supraclavicular block has a good success rate, it remains unclear whether multiple injections are superior to single injection (SI). We compared the sensory block success rate of SI versus triple injection (TI). METHODS: In this randomized double-blind study, 96 end-stage renal disease patients undergoing arteriovenous fistula creation or superficialization were randomly allocated to receive either SI or TI. The primary outcome was the combined score of sensory blockade of the 5 nerves (median, ulnar, radial, medial cutaneous nerve of the forearm, and musculocutaneous) measured at 5, 10, 15, and 20 minutes after injection. Secondary outcome variables were the time to onset of the blockade, performance time (time to do the block), separate success rate for each of the above nerves, success rate of surgical anesthesia, and the complication rate. RESULTS: The combined success of the sensory block was 20% to 31% higher in the TI group than in the SI group at 10, 15, and 20 minutes after injection (all P < 0.035). The block of the musculocutaneous nerve in the TI group was faster and more successful than in the SI group, at all time points (all P < 0.026). The average time needed to perform the block was significantly longer in the TI than the SI group (6.5 ± 2.1 vs 4.7 ± 2.1 minutes, P = 0.001). The overall success of surgical anesthesia measured at 30 minutes did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (96% in TI vs 87% in SI, P = 0.253). CONCLUSIONS: Although the performance time of the SI technique was shorter, TI had a faster onset and resulted in a more successful block of all nerves in the first 20 minutes.
