Autoidentification issues
* Reagents, QC materials etc: no real problems
* Staff: we have gone for barcoded staff badges ith the staff ID number
in a 1-D barcode
* Patients: We have gone for barcoded wristbands with the PAS number in
a 1-D barcode. Originally issued from Clinical Biochemistry, now by ICT.
No data entered other than PAS number.
Connectivity:
Meters to control software: limiting factor was getting the network
points installed. lab now has cordless drill
Control software to LIMs: no real problems, just like an in-laboratory
analyser. But we do have a lot of skill and an in-house LIMS...
Making it happen:
Aaaarghhhh!
So our conclusions are:
* Get all the technology ready (as above), get this done really early
before trying to use it all "joined up"
* Then spend all your time with the ward staff, mostly the nurses in
making it happen. But autoID and data-networking is not a killer
application for these staff. Of course it is for quality and
accountability (currently known as clinical governance. Don't expect
them to understand our approach to SOPs, IQC, EQA etc. You need to get
them engaged and then build up from there.
Jonathan
http://oxmedinfo.jr2.ox.ac.uk/oxpoct/
(Abbott PCx meters and control software)
On Wednesday, October 9, 2002, at 09:57 , Knowles Derek (RR9) Pathology
wrote:
> I carryout a yearly audit of ou Near Patient testing support service
> within
> my patch and one of the weaknesses is the inability to record or
> standardise
> the recording of bood glucose and blood gas results against a positive
> patient id. In the case of glucose we provide documentation sheets that
> should provide this information but these are completed in only 30% of
> all
> tests performed(pressure of work is the reason provided for the poor
> compliance). With blood gas analysis access is denied unless the tester
> input password, operator id and hospital number/patient name. This gives
> them access but in most cases it is impossible to id patients. A mix of
> information including 'bed1, arrest' and other inappropriate
> information is
> used. The gas analysers are not linked to his or path information
> systems.
> New CPA(UK) standards to be introduced next year and local clinical
> governance interest supports the need to change to a system that
> povides an
> audit trail of all patient results irrespective of whether they are
> performed at the bedside or in Pathology. My view is to introduce epr at
> ward level to reduce manaul input of patient information and results
> to a
> minimum.
> Has anyone tackled this issue and if so would you like to share 'the
> experience'? or failing that has anyone any ideas!
> We currently use Advantage meters and Synthesis gas analysers supported
> with
> a lab based Impact DMS used to monitor the 4 analysers.
|