>Basically, if we had more efficient support services, then we probably
>wouldn't really need "RAIT". "RAIT" is merely a reflection of how we have
>to compensate for inefficiencies elsewhere in the system.
Completely agree Adrian. On that point, and it may have been covered before
on the list (and I know there is something at the next RSM about this), but
what are people's experiences of near patient testing (i.e.
accuracy/sensitivity/specificity?, operational problems with introduction?,
cost?)
Sunil
-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Fogarty [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 05 November 2003 22:08
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: RAIT
We run a similar sort of thing, by days, when we've two middle grades or
more. One middle grade "runs" minors, the other one runs "RAIT" together
with majors (as they're so closely related). The clinical consultant tends
to remain floating generally, as they have to deal with complex majors,
complex minors, complex paeds and resus. At nights or weekends we cannot
really continue with the system.
The middle grades are not entirely comfortable with the idea and many find
that they end up just "seeing" the patient anyway; "I've started so I'll
finish" sort of thing. There are also concerns that it will diminish the
training of SHOs, as their patients will already have been "sorted" by the
time they see them.
The real advantage of "RAIT" is in pre-emptive ordering of investigations,
but this could be a rather redundant philosophy if we had more efficient
services at our disposal. In other words, if we accept that blood tests take
90 minutes on average, then it makes sense to order them as the patient
comes through the door so that they're ready by the time the SHO comes to
"clerk" the patient. But tests don't have to take 90 minutes. We have the
technology to get test results within 10 minutes or less, we're just not
taking advantage of this enough.
Basically, if we had more efficient support services, then we probably
wouldn't really need "RAIT". "RAIT" is merely a reflection of how we have to
compensate for inefficiencies elsewhere in the system.
Adrian Fogarty
DISCLAIMER: Unless expressly stated otherwise, the information contained in
this e-mail is confidential and is intended only for the named recipient(s).
If you are not the intended recipient you must not copy, distribute, or take
any action or reliance upon it. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please notify the sender. Any unauthorised disclosure of the information
contained in this e-mail is strictly prohibited.
|