De-freezing frozen patient management.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of two methods in encouraging the consideration of a leap from one patient management routine to another: (i) real-time review of the facts by an external medical team (ii) implementation of the 're-thinking-protocol' ('de-Freezing') by both treating and external medical teams. DESIGN: Students accompanied doctors, nurses and patients as non-interrupting observers. When an obvious gap between the expected and actual findings occurred, it was discussed four times: by two teams (treating team, external medical team) in two discussion modes (real-time review, de-Freezing-questionnaire). The students then recorded if a leap was considered for each discussion. SETTING: The study was conducted in the emergency department of the Baruch Padeh Medical Centre, Poriya, Israel. PARTICIPANTS: All patients were included during times when both medical teams (treating, external) were present. INTERVENTION(S): During 14 periods of 5-7 h each, 459 patients were sampled. In 183 patients, 200 gaps were discovered. RESULTS: The external team considered a leap 76 times, compared with 47 by the treating team (P < 0.001). Using the de-Freezing-protocol, the treating team considered a leap 133 times. Interestingly, even the external team benefited from the de-Freezing protocol and considered a leap 140 times (NS compared to the treating team). CONCLUSIONS: While the importance of timely leaping from one patient management routine to another is emphasized in the training of physicians, medical teams too often fail to do so. The de-Freezing-protocol inexpensively encourages the consideration of a leap beyond what is evoked by the involvement of an external team. The protocol is applicable to all medical processes and should be incorporated into medical practice and education.

Time to follow guidelines, protocols, and structured procedures in medical care and time to leap out.

Present medical practice encourages management according to written guidelines, protocols, and structured procedures (GPPs). Daily medical practice includes instances in which "leaping" from one patient management routine to another is a must. We define "frozen patient management", when patient management leaping was required but was not performed. Frozen patient management may cause significant damage to patient safety and health and the treatment quality. This paper discusses the advantages and disadvantages of GPP-guided medical practice and gives an explanation of the problem of frozen patient management in light of quality engineering, control engineering, and learning processes. Our analysis of frozen patient management is based on consideration of medical care as a process. By considering medical care processes as a closed-loop control process, it is possible to explain why, when an indication for deviation from the expected occurs, it does not necessarily attract the medical teams' attention, thereby preventing the realization that leaping to an alternative patient management is needed. We suggest that working according to GPPs intensifies the frozen patient management problem since working according to GPPs relates to "exploitation learning behavior", while leaping to new patient management relates to "exploration learning behavior". We indicate practice routines to be incorporated into GPP-guided medical care, to reduce frozen patient management.

Development of a novel method of female sterilization: II. Retention of tubal screws in patients undergoing simultaneous laparoscopic sterilization.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This study was a long-term follow-up of patients in whom hysteroscopic tubal screws had been applied at the time of laparoscopic sterilization. METHODS: Tubal screw application was performed before laparoscopic Filshie clip application. Follow-up ultrasonography was arranged 3, 6, and 9 months postoperatively to confirm retention. The tubal screws were removed hysteroscopically between 12 and 20 months after sterilization under local or light general anesthesia. RESULTS: Thirty-five women agreed to take part in the study. For the purpose of analysis, these patients were divided into an initial group (cases 1-20, group A) and a later group (cases 21-35, group B). Twenty-three patients had 41 tubal screws inserted (18 women had bilateral screw application). Twenty tubal screws were removed from 13 patients between 9 and 20 months after insertion, one screw remained in situ, and 20 screws had previously been extruded. Life table analysis plots demonstrated a marked but nonsignificant difference (P = .163) in the duration of tubal screw retention between the initial patients (group A) and the later patients (group B): 46.7% versus 76.9% at 6 months and 33% versus 61.5% at 12 months (P = .09 and P = .11, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our experience demonstrated improved application and retention with experience and refinement of the equipment; however, retention of the tubal screws, even in the later stages of development, was poor. A relatively noninvasive method of female sterilization remains the ideal, and further refinements are required.