PubMed · 4483460
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
T Pietsch. 1972. [Comparisons and perspectives].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/4483460/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
STUDY OBJECTIVE: We determine the effect of emergency department (ED) crowding on paramedic ambulance availability. METHODS: This was a prospective longitudinal study from April 2001 through March 2002 in Los Angeles, CA. All incidents in which a Los Angeles Fire Department ambulance was out of service for more than 15 minutes while waiting to transfer a patient because of the lack of open ED beds were captured and analyzed. Data included the total time each ambulance was out of service and the hospital where paramedics were waiting for an open gurney. Analysis was performed to determine weekly and seasonal variations and preponderance at various hospitals. RESULTS: There were a total of 21,240 incidents in which ambulances were out of service while waiting to transfer their patients to an open ED gurney, which accounted for 1 of every 8 transports. Of these, 8.4% were in excess of 1 hour. The median waiting time per incident was 27 minutes, with an interquartile range of 20 to 40. There was a statistically significant difference in the monthly number of out-of-service incidents during the study (P<.0001), with the highest levels during the winter (January through March). CONCLUSION: ED crowding has resulted in delays for paramedics waiting to transfer patients. This decrease in ambulance availability may have a significant effect on emergency medical services systems' abilities to provide timely response.
A survey was performed to determine the frequency of unrecognized repetitive licking of fingers while reviewing hospital charts by various healthcare professionals who, by this habit, may be putting themselves at risk of acquiring a nosocomial infection. Nine of 14 charts demonstrated the presence of Staphylococci aureus, cultures obtained from three of nine charts grew methicillin-resistant S. aureus, and six grew methicillin-susceptible S. aureus. Of the 50 healthcare professionals surveyed, five (10%) admitted to habitual repetitive licking of fingers while reviewing charts. In addition, 30 (60%) of those surveyed had observed other professionals doing so. Forty-seven (94%) acknowledged that they did not routinely wash their hands after reviewing the charts, potentially placing themselves at risk of acquiring a nosocomial infection. As an immediate consequence of this study, staff members have been encouraged to wash their hands before and after reviewing a patient's chart.
AIMS: To assess possible time benefits of specimen dissection by biomedical scientists (BMSs) and the quality of specimen handling by BMSs, in a department where BMSs trim those specimens requiring simple descriptions, from which standard blocks are taken. METHODS: Specimen handling by BMSs and consultant pathologists was compared. Time taken for each specimen trimmed was recorded prospectively. To determine specimen handling quality, adherence to dissection standard operating procedures (SOPs) was assessed by recording retrospectively whether or not each action in the SOP had been performed. Information on subsequently required extra levels or blocks was recorded. RESULTS: Analysis of data from 672 specimens trimmed by consultants showed that any given action in the SOPs was performed on average on 60.2% of applicable/assessable specimens; for 660 similar specimens trimmed by BMSs, each action was performed on average on 80.1% of specimens. Of the specimens where data on extra blocks were recorded, extra blocks were required in 3% of those trimmed by pathologists and in 4% of those trimmed by BMSs. Extra levels were required in 12% of those trimmed by pathologists and in 16% of those trimmed by BMSs. BMS trimming saves 16 hours of consultant time each month. The difference between pathologists and BMSs in time for each specimen trimmed is negligible. CONCLUSIONS: The advantages of increased adherence to trimming SOPs and saving consultant time outweigh the relatively small number of extra blocks and levels required when BMSs trim. There is no reduction in quality of dissection.