Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 16333061

Bar-coding medication administration overview and consensus recommendations.

Abstract

The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Joseph Cummings, Paul Bush, Douglas Smith, Karl Matuszewski, UHC Bar-Coding Task Force. 2005-12-15. Bar-coding medication administration overview and consensus recommendations.. https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp050222

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

MDCT for suspected pulmonary embolism: multi-institutional survey of 16-MDCT data acquisition protocols.

The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which a consensus exists on multidetector row computed tomography (MDCT) protocol parameters for suspected pulmonary embolism (PE). In August of 2004, a questionnaire addressing a number of body MDCT protocols was mailed to 99 fellows of the Society of Computed Body Tomography, representing a total of 46 institutions. In May 2005, this was followed up with a second mailing. The survey requested details pertaining to protocols for the most advanced MDCT scanner in the department. The overall survey response rate of 37% (17/46) yielded 15 protocols for 16-MDCT imaging of suspected PE. This data was tabulated and revealed a consensus for the use of bolus tracking, rapid contrast infusion, caudo-cranial scanning, the narrowest detector row collimation, and thin (<2 mm) reconstruction sections. However, contrast infusion timing, contrast concentration, and implementation of radiation dose modulation were variable. This compilation of protocols reflects recently published studies advocating the use of narrow acquisition collimation and reconstruction sections for MDCT of suspected PE. Future studies are necessary to elucidate the optimal intravenous contrast infusion parameters and further assess the efficacy of reduced radiation dose protocols.

Consensus↗

Metrics in the science of surge.

Metrics are the driver to positive change toward better patient care. However, the research into the metrics of the science of surge is incomplete, research funding is inadequate, and we lack a criterion standard metric for identifying and quantifying surge capacity. Therefore, a consensus working group was formed through a "viral invitation" process. With a combination of online discussion through a group e-mail list and in-person discussion at a breakout session of the Academic Emergency Medicine 2006 Consensus Conference, "The Science of Surge," seven consensus statements were generated. These statements emphasize the importance of funded research in the area of surge capacity metrics; the utility of an emergency medicine research registry; the need to make the data available to clinicians, administrators, public health officials, and internal and external systems; the importance of real-time data, data standards, and electronic transmission; seamless integration of data capture into the care process; the value of having data available from a single point of access through which data mining, forecasting, and modeling can be performed; and the basic necessity of a criterion standard metric for quantifying surge capacity. Further consensus work is needed to select a criterion standard metric for quantifying surge capacity. These consensus statements cover the future research needs, the infrastructure needs, and the data that are needed for a state-of-the-art approach to surge and surge capacity.

Consensus↗