Door to MD / Door to Mid-level Treatment Time Simple Sampler
Statistics Shmatistics!
Got a watch? Can you count to ten? Like INSTANT results?
Want your Emergency Care Door-to-MD / Mid-level Treatment time down to BELOW 30 minutes RELIABLY, or your Urgent Care Door-to-MD/ Mid-level Treatment under 15 minutes?
Why measure it and "wait for the data" when you can
SEE IT!
TRACK IT!
and F I X I T !
at THE SAME TIME?
Such a deal!
POSTED EMERGENCY ROOM WAITING TIMES ARE OFTEN FAKE
We have seen a recent trend in Emergency Services and that is posting waiting times on billboards, or the Hospital's internet front page that are very short - 20 minutes, 15 minutes, 10 minutes.
When we dig into the data, we find that the traditional standard measure of Door to Treatment (that includes Patient entrance into the waiting area, greeting, registration, triage [in Waiting Area or at bedside], Caregiver Assessment/Teaching, initial lab draws, MD / Mid-level reviews chart and then MD / Mid-level enters room, assesses and begins Treatment) is not actually being used. A new measure has been created. The traditional measure was called Door to MD / Mid-Level Treatment.
And the new measure is called "Waiting Time to Being Seen": But not necessarily seen by the MD or Mid-Level. Sometimes it is "waiting time to be seen" by a greeter or clerk. When it is an MD, Mid-Level or RN, it is not necessarily "waiting time to be seen" for actual Triage and Clinical Assessment; often it is nothing more than "being seen" by an RN, Mid-Level or MD passing through the waiting area, or initially greeting the patient at the front desk. No actual history, assessment or anything that could legitimately qualify as clinical work is being done at that point where this "waiting time" is proclaimed as over.
The actual formal clinical Triage assessment is still later in the process. And the additional waiting time to get there is now hidden from the claimed metric for "waiting time".
Furthermore the "waiting to be seen" metric doesn't always begin at the door. Originally, the "Door to MD / Mid-Level Treatment Begins" started when the patient first entered the door of the waiting area or the Emergency Trauma entrance of the Hospital.
The new metric doesn't start at the door. Now the starting point for this time measurement begins when the Registrar enters the patient's information into the computer, and that is generally when the patient is registered.
That happens after the patient has walked in the door, and after they have waited often at the end of a long line to speak to the registrar. Or simply waited for some time until a registrar or RN returned to the waiting area desk. Is this really the fair starting point for the patient's experience? No. The starting point is the moment they open the door and walk in or are rolled in.
A great deal of actual waiting time has been hidden from this highly touted new statistic, making it misleading.
But it makes the waiting time to RN, MD or Mid-level, indeed the entire Emergency Deparment Length of Stay look much better than it actually is!
Yes, metrics can be faked and often are.
These are all part of cutting corners on the metric to make the numbers look better because they are not actually part of making the flow more efficient for patients.
These times are not Door-to-MD / Mid-Level Treatment times according to the standardized, traditional metric.
DIRECT-TO-BED DONE WRONG MAKES THINGS WORSE
Some hospitals do bring patients directly to the bed in back when there is an empty and staffed bed, and this is a great strategy to reducing waiting time and potential medical error. But only so long as the RN completes the Triage work, initial labs, assessments and immediate interventions that are all part of the appropriate clinical pathway IMMEDIATELY when the patient is brought back. This expedites the MD /Mid-Level entering the room sooner to make their full assessment and begin formal intervention.
But Direct-to-Bed alone is not a fix and in isolation can make things worse, adding delay, neglect and medical error because, as we have seen, this can be used to warehouse a patient in the back where they are now isolated and still don't get rapid treatment.
Indeed, in some cases delays got longer, and clinical issues arose from those delays because the waiting room looked empty; the patient was now "out of sight - out of mind"; and no one really knew that the patient waiting in an Emergency Room bed in back hadn't yet been seen by RN, MD or Mid-level.
In fact, once they were placed into a bed in back, their actual status became a mystery - they fell into a crack in the process that looked on the tracking board like they were being assessed and treated, as though they had been seen by the RN but "seen" and "treated" are two different things - so the patient fell into a void, a twilight zone. On the tracking board, they were in a bed with an assigned nurse, maybe even seen by her or him so it looked like something was going on. But the RN assigned to that bed had not actually taken the assignment of that patient.
This is the problem with popular solutions that are not made in concert with actually changing the responsibilities, competencies, teamwork and communication points, but merely fixing the physical flow, or mechanically and mindlessly tracking data points in the computer.
The actual formal clinical Triage assessment is still later in the process. And the additional waiting time to get there is now hidden from the claimed metric for "waiting time".
Furthermore the "waiting to be seen" metric doesn't always begin at the door. Originally, the "Door to MD / Mid-Level Treatment Begins" started when the patient first entered the door of the waiting area or the Emergency Trauma entrance of the Hospital.
The new metric doesn't start at the door. Now the starting point for this time measurement begins when the Registrar enters the patient's information into the computer, and that is generally when the patient is registered.
That happens after the patient has walked in the door, and after they have waited often at the end of a long line to speak to the registrar. Or simply waited for some time until a registrar or RN returned to the waiting area desk. Is this really the fair starting point for the patient's experience? No. The starting point is the moment they open the door and walk in or are rolled in.
A great deal of actual waiting time has been hidden from this highly touted new statistic, making it misleading.
But it makes the waiting time to RN, MD or Mid-level, indeed the entire Emergency Deparment Length of Stay look much better than it actually is!
Yes, metrics can be faked and often are.
These are all part of cutting corners on the metric to make the numbers look better because they are not actually part of making the flow more efficient for patients.
These times are not Door-to-MD / Mid-Level Treatment times according to the standardized, traditional metric.
DIRECT-TO-BED DONE WRONG MAKES THINGS WORSE
Some hospitals do bring patients directly to the bed in back when there is an empty and staffed bed, and this is a great strategy to reducing waiting time and potential medical error. But only so long as the RN completes the Triage work, initial labs, assessments and immediate interventions that are all part of the appropriate clinical pathway IMMEDIATELY when the patient is brought back. This expedites the MD /Mid-Level entering the room sooner to make their full assessment and begin formal intervention.
But Direct-to-Bed alone is not a fix and in isolation can make things worse, adding delay, neglect and medical error because, as we have seen, this can be used to warehouse a patient in the back where they are now isolated and still don't get rapid treatment.
Indeed, in some cases delays got longer, and clinical issues arose from those delays because the waiting room looked empty; the patient was now "out of sight - out of mind"; and no one really knew that the patient waiting in an Emergency Room bed in back hadn't yet been seen by RN, MD or Mid-level.
In fact, once they were placed into a bed in back, their actual status became a mystery - they fell into a crack in the process that looked on the tracking board like they were being assessed and treated, as though they had been seen by the RN but "seen" and "treated" are two different things - so the patient fell into a void, a twilight zone. On the tracking board, they were in a bed with an assigned nurse, maybe even seen by her or him so it looked like something was going on. But the RN assigned to that bed had not actually taken the assignment of that patient.
This is the problem with popular solutions that are not made in concert with actually changing the responsibilities, competencies, teamwork and communication points, but merely fixing the physical flow, or mechanically and mindlessly tracking data points in the computer.
Rather than fix the actual problems, some Hospitals have found a way to dissimulate (nice word for fibbing or misleading) by cutting corners on what they actually report as "waiting time". They compromise the original intention of waiting time: How long does the patient have to wait before their treatment begins? Door To Treatment!
In our discussion today, we aren't talking about the fake "Waiting Time in Our Emergency Department waiting Room" metric that some hospitals brag about and even post on bill boards and on the internet.
We are here talking about the real thing: The time from when the patient opens the door to enter the building to the time the MD or Mid-Level begins treatment.
And that time can be and is well under 30 minutes in the top performing hospitals - even in complex Trauma Centers that are also university teaching hospitals - such as Duke University Hospital - a shining example of this level of performance.
How can you take that next step in the journey of your own Emergency Department?
You can learn from the stuff we did with Duke and other Number One Hospitals:
We are here talking about the real thing: The time from when the patient opens the door to enter the building to the time the MD or Mid-Level begins treatment.
And that time can be and is well under 30 minutes in the top performing hospitals - even in complex Trauma Centers that are also university teaching hospitals - such as Duke University Hospital - a shining example of this level of performance.
How can you take that next step in the journey of your own Emergency Department?
You can learn from the stuff we did with Duke and other Number One Hospitals:
SEE THE FLOW - BE THE FLOW
No comments:
Post a Comment