PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: Quality improvement (QI) is a major focus of all departments and fields of health care, including emergency medical services. The chaotic and rapidly evolving atmosphere in which paramedics must practice can lead to inconsistency between what is documented and the actual events. This leads to difficulty when trying to evaluate the practitioners and when implementing a QI program. In this study, we evaluated the prevalence of discrepancy between the video and written record for Rapid Sequence Intubation (RSI) performed in the field as a demonstration of the utility of video documentation in QI.
UNASSIGNED: We used a systematic retrospective chart review to compare written with video documentation in 100 consecutive prehospital RSI encounters in a single EMS agency.
UNASSIGNED: Of the patient care records (PCRs), only 6% matched the video record for all quality measures tracked. The largest reason for the discrepancy was in the time required to intubate (58%) whether LEMON was evaluated (42%), total number of intubation attempts (36%), first attempt success (24%), BVM used (18%), and whether an airway introducer device was used (12%).
UNASSIGNED: Written documentation is inaccurate compared to video documentation when used as a quality improvement process for EMS prehospital RSI encounters.
UNASSIGNED: We used a systematic retrospective chart review to compare written with video documentation in 100 consecutive prehospital RSI encounters in a single EMS agency.
UNASSIGNED: Of the patient care records (PCRs), only 6% matched the video record for all quality measures tracked. The largest reason for the discrepancy was in the time required to intubate (58%) whether LEMON was evaluated (42%), total number of intubation attempts (36%), first attempt success (24%), BVM used (18%), and whether an airway introducer device was used (12%).
UNASSIGNED: Written documentation is inaccurate compared to video documentation when used as a quality improvement process for EMS prehospital RSI encounters.
摘要：
■质量改进（QI）是医疗保健所有部门和领域的主要重点，包括紧急医疗服务。护理人员必须练习的混乱和快速发展的气氛可能导致记录的内容与实际事件之间的不一致。这导致在尝试评估从业者和实施QI计划时遇到困难。在这项研究中,我们评估了现场进行的快速序列插管(RSI)的视频和书面记录之间差异的发生率,以证明视频文档在QI中的实用性.
■我们使用了系统的回顾性图表审查，比较了在单个EMS机构中连续100次院前RSI遇到的视频文档。
■在患者护理记录(PCRs)中，对于所有跟踪的质量指标，只有6%与视频记录相匹配。差异的最大原因是插管所需的时间（58％）是否评估了LEMON（42％），插管尝试总数（36%），首次尝试成功（24%），使用BVM（18%），以及是否使用了气道导入器(12%).
■当书面文档用作EMS院前RSI遇到的质量改进过程时，与视频文档相比，书面文档不准确。
■我们使用了系统的回顾性图表审查，比较了在单个EMS机构中连续100次院前RSI遇到的视频文档。
■在患者护理记录(PCRs)中，对于所有跟踪的质量指标，只有6%与视频记录相匹配。差异的最大原因是插管所需的时间（58％）是否评估了LEMON（42％），插管尝试总数（36%），首次尝试成功（24%），使用BVM（18%），以及是否使用了气道导入器(12%).
■当书面文档用作EMS院前RSI遇到的质量改进过程时，与视频文档相比，书面文档不准确。
