[1]王 瑶,陈 慧,林 莉,等.重大传染病一级预检分诊持续质量控制[J].医学信息,2021,34(01):134-136.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2021.01.036]
　WANG Yao,CHEN Hui,LIN Li,et al.Continuous Quality Control of First-level Pre-Examination and Triage of Serious Infectious Diseases[J].Medical Information,2021,34(01):134-136.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2021.01.036]
点击复制

重大传染病一级预检分诊持续质量控制()
分享到：

医学信息[ISSN:1006-1959/CN:61-1278/R]

卷:
34卷
期数:
2021年01期
页码:
134-136
栏目:
临床研究
出版日期:
2021-01-01

文章信息/Info

Title:
Continuous Quality Control of First-level Pre-Examination and Triage of Serious Infectious Diseases
文章编号:
1006-1959（2021）01-0134-03
作者:
王 瑶; 陈 慧; 林 莉; 等
（四川绵阳四〇四医院医院感染管理科，四川 绵阳 621000）
Author(s):
WANG Yao; CHEN Hui; LIN Li; et al.
(Hospital Infection Management Department,Sichuan Mianyang 404 Hospital,Mianyang 621000,Sichuan,China)
关键词:
重大传染病; 一级预检分诊; 分诊质量; 质量控制; 持续改进
Keywords:
Serious infectious diseases; First-level pre-examination and triage; Triage quality; Quality control; Continuous improvement
分类号:
R19
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2021.01.036
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的 对重大传染病一级预检分诊进行质量控制，并对影响分诊质量的主要因素进行分析、改进，提升一级预检分诊质量。方法 选取2020年1月25日~2月10日我院就诊通过一级预检分诊的患者为研究对象，其中1月25日~1月30日就诊的患者设为首次质控组，2月4日~2月10日就诊的患者设为再次质控组，每组300例。首次质控时由质控团队对一级预检分诊进行现场督查，观察分诊人员是否将8个质控指标实施完善，评定每位患者预检分诊质量；再次质控组根据首次质控时分诊质量的主要因素进行持续改进后，再次由质控团队进行现场督查，患者分诊质量评定方法与首次质控时相同，比较两组分诊质量及8个质控指标实施情况。结果 再次质控组分诊质量优良占比为90.33%，高于首次质控组的39.67%，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。两组暴露日期、暴露地点、有无咳嗽症状中完成占比比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；而再次质控组暴露次数或总时间、暴露方式、体温异常是否复测、有无乏力症状、分诊登记是否清楚完成占比高于首次质控组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论 通过对一级预检分诊进行持续质量控制，可提高医院一级预检分诊的分诊质量，降低质控指标遗漏比例。
Abstract:
Objective Quality control of the first-level pre-examination and triage for serious infectious diseases is conducted, and the main factors affecting the quality of triage are analyzed and improved to upgrade the quality of the first-level pre-examination and triage.Methods From January 25 to February 10, 2020, all patients who had passed the first-level pre-examination and triage were selected as the study objects. The patients who had visited the hospital from January 25 to January 30 were set as the first quality control group, and the patients who had visited the hospital from February 4 to February 10 were set as the second quality control group, with 300 cases in each group.During the first quality control, the quality control team conducted on-site supervision on the first-level of pre-examination and triage, observed whether the triage personnels had completed the 8 quality control indicators, and assessed the triage quality of each patient;After the quality control group made continuous improvement based on the main factors of triage quality during the first quality control, the quality control team again conducted on-site supervision. The evaluation method of patient triage quality was the same as that of the first quality control. Compare the quality of the two groups and 8 Implementation of each quality control index.Results The second quality control group accounted for 90.33% of the diagnosis quality, which was higher than 39.67% of the first quality control group,the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups of exposure date, exposure location, and the proportion of completion of cough symptoms (P>0.05); while the number of exposures or total time, exposure mode, and abnormal temperature of the second quality control group the proportion of no fatigue symptoms and whether the triage registration was clearly completed was higher than that of the first quality control group,the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).Conclusion Through continuous quality control of the first-level pre-inspection and triage, the quality of the first-level pre-inspection and triage in the hospital can be improved and the percentage of missed quality control indicators can be reduced.

参考文献/References:

[1]张丹,余媛,陈军华,等.大型综合医院发热门诊新型冠状病毒感染预检分诊管理实践[J].护理研究,2020,34(4):1-2. [2]申国立,王蕾,谢娟,等.浅谈急诊预检分诊工作技巧及意义[J].中国组织工程研究,2014,18(B05):278. [3]王莹."三区四级"预检分诊法在急诊分诊中的临床应用效果研究[D].吉林大学,2018. [4]张玉琴.护理管理提高门诊分诊质量的效果评价[J].医学理论与实践,2013,26(23):3217-3218. [5]黄雪丽,郭爱敏.国外常用急诊分诊标准的使用现况及评价[J].中华护理杂志,2014,49(5):597-601. [6]郭淑岩,韩刚,李萌,等.应用PDCA循环法改善呼吸道传染病预检分诊人员的态度及行为[J].中国医疗管理科学,2018,8(3):22-27. [7]刘群,袁楚樊,何沛兰,等.智能化急诊四级三区预检分诊标准信息系统的设计与应用研究[J].岭南急诊医学杂志,2019,24(2):189-191.

更新日期/Last Update: 1900-01-01