Another question on workloads.
Has the number of analytes or profiles offered by the
lab increased significantly in the same period? For
example lipids, cardiac markers, CRP, TFT's, or is the
increase mirrored in the "old " general chemistry ie
U&E's, LFT's etc.? Perhaps all labs should have a
Workload Officer. If he/she could halt or slow down
the increase think of the budget savings.......
We are told, by the government, that more people are
being treated by the NHS than ever before?
David Brown
--- "Reynolds Tim (RJF) Burtonh-tr"
<[log in to unmask]> wrote: >
One interpretation of the trend towards guidelines
> is that they are not
> there for the benefit of staff to ensure that they
> know the correct
> procedure: Management knows that there is no way any
> one individual could
> read, digest, understand and remember all of the
> policies and guidelines in
> place at any one time (millions of pages, given that
> computers now allow us
> to be as verbose as we like, without wasting any
> real trees); let alone keep
> up with changes. Furthermore it would be impossible
> to check the guideline
> every time a procedure is carried out.
>
> The real function of guideleines is to allow an
> individual transgressor to
> be blamed when an error occurs, thus off-setting the
> institution's blame on
> an unwitting scapegoat.
>
>
> TIM
>
>
****************************************************************************
> *********
> Prof. Tim Reynolds,
> Clinical Chemistry Department,
> Queens Hospital,
> Belvedere Rd.,
> Burton-on-Trent,
> STAFFORDSHIRE,
> DE13 0RB,
> UK.
> tel: 01283 511511 ext. 4035
> fax: 01283 593064
> email: [log in to unmask]
> alternative email for the all too frequent occasions
> when the NHS email
> connection doesn't work:
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
****************************************************************************
> **********
> IMPORTANT: This email is intended for the use of the
> individual
> addressee(s)named above and may contain information
> that is confidential
> privileged or unsuitable for overly sensitive
> persons with low self-esteem,
> no sense of humour or irrational religious beliefs.
> If you are not the
> intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution
> or copying of this email
> is not authorized (either explicitly or implicitly)
> and constitutes an
> irritating social faux pas. Unless the word
> absquatulation has been used in
> its correct context somewhere other than in this
> warning, it does not have
> any legal or grammatical use and may be ignored. No
> animals were harmed in
> the transmission of this email, though the kelpie
> next door is living on
> borrowed time, let me tell you. Those of you with an
> overwhelming fear of
> the unknown will be gratified to learn there is no
> hidden message revealed
> by reading this backwards, so just ignore that Alert
> Notice from Macroshaft.
> However, by pouring a complete circle of salt around
> yourself and your
> computer you can ensure that no harm befalls you and
> your pets. If you have
> received this eMail in error, please add some nutmeg
> and egg whites, whisk,
> and place in a warm oven for 40 minutes.
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Cudd Peter, Pathology Workload Project
> Officer, Path Lab
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: 17 January 2003 11:39
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Mass production of tests
> >
> >
> > > I have been watching the discussions on
> Biochemistry
> > workload with interest. I have been appointed on a
> six month
> > contract to investigate the use of Pathology
> services (i.e.
> > Biochemistry, Haematology, Immunology and
> Microbiology,
> > Histopathology is excluded from my investigations)
> at
> > Rotherham DGH. I recognise and agree with many of
> the factors
> > that have been raised as issues/influences on
> increasing
> > Biochemistry workload. In Rotherham analysis over
> the last
> > three years clearly shows that increased demand is
> > out-stripping the increase in patient throughput.
> Another
> > factor that I don't believe has been mentioned is
> that on
> > average the patients today in hospital are more
> severly ill
> > and may well require more investigations.
> > >
> > > My experience in Rotherham suggests that a
> significant
> > factor is that there is a mutual
> communication/education gap
> > that exists between Pathology and the 'customer'
> > wards/units/departments. It seems the main reasons
> for this
> > are : lack of time/resource; traditional
> practises; and in
> > some cases, an unwillingness to fully
> co-operate/collaborate
> > with changes.
> > >
> > > I have also found, unfortunately, that much of
> the critical
> > information required to better manage Pathology
> workload is
> > NOT embodied in protocols or guidelines in use in
> the
> > hospital. It probably wont be news to most of you
> that, it
> > would be an error to assume that ALL junior
> doctors and
> > nursing staff have ready access to documented
> protocols that
> > advise them what pathology investigations are
> appropriate,
> > even less so to information that helps them to
> decide how
> > frequently to repeat tests. Furthermore, even if
> the latter
> > have been created and are readily available its
> also not the
> > case that staff take advantage of them. Ownership
> of
> > knowledge and its use in the wards is also a
> hampering factor
> > in obtaining practical and readily available
> guidelines.
> > >
> > > Having said all the above, it also true that
> most nurses
> > successfully and accurately follow the guidelines
> they have.
> > >
> > > Any attempt to manage (or control) demand for
> pathology
> > investigations must consider how the decisions are
> currently made.
> > >
> > > I am currently busy trying to collect
> information on how
> > and what clinical information is used to drive the
> choice of
> > pathology investigations by most consultants and
> nurse
> > practitioners, and a sample of the junior doctors.
> The level
> > of detailed information required to obtain this is
> likely to
> > be too great to get a complete picture in my
> remaining time.
> > However the information gathered should also
> highlight how
> > much variation in practise there is across medical
> teams, my
> > work has already established the variation in
> practise across
> > the hospital directorates, including some
> excellent and poor
> > practise. I am also looking at methods of
> providing automated
> > feedback to consultants on how well their teams
> are at
> > working with pathology (specifically in the first
> instance
> > simply looking at how well the investigation
> request forms
> > are completed).
> > >
> > > As far as my findings go I am sure that some
> places will be
> > better and others worse.
> > >
> > > Rotherham DGH is about to embark on internal
> trading for
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com
------ACB discussion List Information--------
This is an open discussion list for the academic and clinical
community working in clinical biochemistry.
Please note, archived messages are public and can be viewed
via the internet. Views expressed are those of the individual and
they are responsible for all message content.
ACB Web Site
http://www.acb.org.uk
List Archives
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ACB-CLIN-CHEM-GEN.html
List Instructions (How to leave etc.)
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/
|