Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35903560›Full record

ArticleCureus2022

A Three-Step System to Ensure Correct Attribution of Named Clinicians for Inpatients.

Abdel Saed

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 93% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Abdel SaedTrauma and Orthopaedics, Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast, GBR.
Royal Victoria Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Francis report recommends that all patients admitted into a UK hospital must have a named identifiable and suitably trained consultant or clinician in charge of their care. This is regarded as a shared responsibility as highlighted by the recommendations made by the General Medical Council Best Practice guidance. However, this can become more error-prone, particularly in acute trauma and orthopaedic inpatients when the named consultant may change numerous times.

methodsWe conducted an audit reviewing all the inpatients in the acute trauma and orthopaedic wards and then reaudited twice following the introduction of the three-step system. The results were then analysed and compared with previous cycle results.

resultsInitially following the introduction of the three-step system, there were poorer outcomes. Inpatients with the correct named consultant declined from 47% to 37%. However, following further education and training of each respective member of the multidisciplinary roles, the results were much improved with 88.9% of the inpatients having the correct named consultant.

conclusionsEnsuring that all inpatients have the correct named consultant is a shared responsibility amongst all health and social care staff involved with the patient. This audit highlights that attributing specific roles to relevant members of the multidisciplinary team can improve communications and patient care.

Indexed as

communicationnamed consultantquality improvementresponsible cliniciantrauma and orthopaedics

Identifiers

PMID35903560
PMCPMC9322072
OpenAlexW4283517075

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.