ArticleBMJ quality improvement reports2014
Improving the inpatient oncology experience through a new consultant ward round.
Article in BMJ quality improvement reports, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Regular consultant ward rounds have been shown to reduce the length of stay and improve the discharge planning for patients (1). To balance the competing demands of outpatient activity and inpatient oncology, it has been difficult to provide specialist care in our hospital. Previously, inpatients were managed primarily by the oncology specialist trainees, who are qualified in internal medicine, with an ad-hoc review by their named consultant. A regular consultant ward round was introduced for the first time on the 7/1/13. Each consultant was timetabled to give a twice weekly morning ward round on a rolling rota. To evaluate this intervention, a retrospective case note analysis was undertaken. This included all patients admitted under oncology for the two months preceding and succeeding the new ward round. For each patient the admission date, time to first consultant review, number of consultant reviews, time to discharge after consultant review, and discharge date was identified. A staff survey also took place. Statistical analysis was performed using Mann-Whitney U or Chi-Squared tests. 85 patient episodes met the inclusion criteria. Case notes were available for 63 episodes (74%). The average length of stay significantly decreased from 11 days to three and half days (p<0.05). The time to discharge after first consultant review also significantly decreased from six days to two days (p<0.05). The number of consultant reviews and time to first consultant review remained unchanged (p>0.05). The percentage of patients receiving a consultant review increased, from 54.3% to 71.4%, though this was not statistically significant. However it is likely such a large increase is clinically significant. Medical and nursing staff satisfaction also improved. This study suggests that a regular consultant ward round improves length of stay for patients. This is possibly because an increase in patients received a consultant review and that the treatment and discharge decisions were expedited after such a review.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.