Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
95 PIC- ED up: Creating a feedback loop for patients admitted from ED to PICU
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
95 PIC- ED up: Creating a feedback loop for patients admitted from ED to PICU
Do you wish to request the book?
95 PIC- ED up: Creating a feedback loop for patients admitted from ED to PICU
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
95 PIC- ED up: Creating a feedback loop for patients admitted from ED to PICU
2023
Overview
ObjectivesThis project aims to establish a robust feedback loop between PICU- ED in order to encourage real time feedback and shared learning. RCEM/FICM 20211 ‘Better Together’ document highlights the need for ‘robust processes for learning from excellence and incidents’ as well as collaborative learning between teams. From experience there is often formal feedback in the event that an admission triggers a discussion at M+M or equivalent panel however regular timely feedback, especially for nursing colleagues is something that we felt could be improved.MethodsSurvey was carried out and sent to ALL ED staff to review if there was a need for this- 40 respondents medical and nursing 60% (24/40).Results50% of respondents (20/40) Rarely received feedback from patients admitted from ED- PICU with 15% (6/40) responding Never. 98% (39/40) of respondents strongly agreed or agreed that they would like to receive feedback. The time interval for which staff would like to receive feedback for the majority of people was <5 days 78% (31/40). 80% (32/40) of respondents wanted to be given the information via nhs.net email, therefore a generic email address was created (bwc.pic-edup@nhs.net). 73% (29/40) did not mind who communicated the information, the most popular choice after this was the PEM registrar 28% (11/40) who we felt created a good link between ED and PICU.ConclusionA central email address was created and PEM Registrars (3) agreed to be part of the project with a PICU Consultant overseeing and delivering feedback. Generic feedback table (see promotional poster PDF) was formulated and sent back to ED nursing staff and ED Clinicians upon requested via email. In addition to the feedback table suggested resources for further reading were signposted. A survey link was sent out to enable those receiving feedback to inform the PIC- EDUp team of how they felt afterwards in addition to any additional areas they would have found useful to get more information on.We feel that this has created a robust feedback loop which looks at diagnosis in addition to areas for learning and excellence. Some initial feedback from those who requested and then received the information (responses ongoing at the time of writing this abstract) stated ‘I think this is a GREAT project and extremely beneficial for ED staff with proving some form of closure to cases once they are taken to PICU. I am personally grateful this was set up! Thankyou’.Referencehttps://www.ficm.ac.uk/better-together-collaborative-working-between-emergency-medicine-and-critical-care-framework
Publisher
BMJ Publishing Group LTD
Subject
