Quality Assurance Processes Ensuring Appropriate Follow-up of Test Results Pending at Discharge in Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review - 21/10/20
, Hanna Jalali, BSc a, Ani Orchanian-Cheff, MISt c, Lucas B. Chartier, MD CM, MPH b, dAbstract |
Study objective |
In many cases, emergency department (ED) care leads to investigations for which there are not final results at patient disposition. The follow-up for these test results pending at discharge, most commonly final diagnostic imaging reports and microbiology cultures, is a significant safety concern for patients and a medicolegal risk for ED practitioners. Our objective is to perform a systematic review of the literature and report on the structure and outcomes of existing ED quality assurance processes to address these test results pending at discharge.
Methods |
We searched for studies that reported processes to ensure follow-up of test results pending at discharge for patients discharged from ED settings in 6 relevant databases, from inception to June 11, 2019. We appraised the quality of each study and extracted characteristics of the quality assurance process being discussed, as well as its influence and outcomes, cost, and feasibility.
Results |
We identified 17,862 studies, and 17 met our criteria for inclusion. Four major processes were identified to improve the follow-up of test results pending at discharge: only nurses or clerks involved, physician-driven process, direct patient contact, and pharmacist-led process. The 5 recommendations generated by our literature review included dedicating staff to the quality assurance process, protecting their quality assurance time from clinical duties, ensuring electronic medical record integration, encouraging collaboration among health care disciplines, and engaging patients.
Conclusion |
A variety of quality assurance processes have been described to follow up on ED test results pending at discharge, and we provided recommendations to improve patient care. All ED leaders should consider implementing these according to their local context.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Plan
| Please see page 660 for the Editor’s Capsule Summary of this article. |
|
| Supervising editor: Kristin L. Rising, MD, MS. Specific detailed information about possible conflict of interest for individual editors is available at editors. |
|
| Author contributions: All authors were involved in conception of study, design of the study, data collection and abstraction, drafting and revision of the manuscript. The literature searches were conducted by AO-C, JSM, and LBC. All authors analyzed the data and JSM and HJ performed qualitative analyses. LBC takes responsibility for the paper as a whole. |
|
| All authors attest to meeting the four ICMJE.org authorship criteria: (1) Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND (2) Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND (3) Final approval of the version to be published; AND (4) Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. |
|
| Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article as per ICMJE conflict of interest guidelines (see www.icmje.org). The authors have stated that no such relationships exist. |
Vol 76 - N° 5
P. 659-674 - novembre 2020 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?
