Top Banner
Quality Improvement in Action Reducing patient turn away at a NC County STI Clinic Samantha Charm, Jennifer Hill, Ashley Marshall, Eva Fernández, Brianne Kallam, and Jaimie Lea
34

Quality Improvement in Action

Jul 18, 2015

Download

Healthcare

Jennifer Hill
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Quality Improvement in Action

Quality Improvement

in Action

Reducing patient turn away at a NC County STI Clinic

Samantha Charm, Jennifer Hill, Ashley Marshall, Eva Fernández, Brianne Kallam, and Jaimie Lea

Page 2: Quality Improvement in Action

Presentation Objectives

• Overview of approach

• Data collection and baseline data

• Changes

• Results

• Next steps

Page 3: Quality Improvement in Action

MODEL FOR IMPROVEMENT

Page 4: Quality Improvement in Action

Image: http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/HowtoImprove/default.aspx

Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) Cycle

Three Fundamental Questions

Set aims Established measures Selected changes

Planned the change Tried the change Observed the results Acted on what we learned

Page 5: Quality Improvement in Action

PDSA Cycles

Small scale changes that are refined through multiple rounds of testing.

Image: http://sisep.fpg.unc.edu/news/sisep-enotes-july-2012

Page 6: Quality Improvement in Action

Aim for Our Project

Reduce the weekly number of patients turned away from the NC County STI Clinic.

Page 7: Quality Improvement in Action

Understanding the Clinic

• Observations and shadowing

• Patient and staff interviews

• Mapping work flows

• Timing steps of work flow

Page 8: Quality Improvement in Action

What We Observed

Observations: • Busy staff with varied responsibilities • Reliance on verbal communication • Long wait times at registration

Hypotheses: • Bottlenecks → Longer patient wait times → Turn away • Potential to see more patients

Page 9: Quality Improvement in Action

Data Collection

Page 10: Quality Improvement in Action

Data Collection Methods

Returning Client Tickets

Clinic Volume

Wait Time of Registration

Page 11: Quality Improvement in Action

Definitions of Turn Away

NC HHS Definition: Patient who is unable to be seen within 24 hours of first attempt at seeing a provider.

Project Definition: Patient who is told they cannot be seen during that clinic and will need to return at a later time.

Page 12: Quality Improvement in Action

Measuring Turn Away

Page 13: Quality Improvement in Action

Measuring Clinic Volume

The weekly number of patients seen by a clinic provider.

Page 14: Quality Improvement in Action

Measuring Wait Time

Complete Intake Process

Place the Chart in the box for

provider use

Give patient number or add

them to the wait list

= Time recorded

The amount of time it takes after a patient is given a number to when their chart is ready for provider use.

Complete Registration

Page 15: Quality Improvement in Action

Baseline Results

Page 16: Quality Improvement in Action

Patients Turned Away at Baseline

State Definition

21 Patients turned away

= 10% 214 Patients who walked

in the door

Alternate Definition

29 Patients turned away

= 14% 214 Patients who walked

in the door

Page 17: Quality Improvement in Action

Wait Time in Minutes at Baseline

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 101-110 111-120 121-130 131-140

Fre

qu

en

cy

Wait time between registration and chart up (minutes)

Under 1 hour: 59% 1-1.5 hours: 19% Over 1.5 hours: 22%

Page 18: Quality Improvement in Action

Changes

Page 19: Quality Improvement in Action

Implemented Package of Changes

Intake and Registration Process

• Expedited registration for first two patients

• Clipboard for patient information collection

Appointments and Scheduling

• Chart of initial number of walk-in appointments

• Same/next day appointments for patients turned away

Staff Communication

• Communication board

Page 20: Quality Improvement in Action

Expedited Registration Process

Page 21: Quality Improvement in Action

Image credit: Eva Fernandez

Clipboard for Patient Information Collection

Page 22: Quality Improvement in Action
Page 23: Quality Improvement in Action

Same Day & Next Day Appointments

Page 24: Quality Improvement in Action

Staff Communication Board

Image credit: Samantha Charm

Page 25: Quality Improvement in Action

What We Learned

Page 26: Quality Improvement in Action

Percent of Patients Turned Away After Changes

13.6%

9.8%

3.5%

0.0%

Project Defintion State Defintion

Before

After

Page 27: Quality Improvement in Action

• An increase in the number of patients seen • 185 at baseline compared to 217 at follow up

• One less intake staff member

Patient Turn Away Decreased Despite...

Page 28: Quality Improvement in Action

Patient Wait Time After Changes

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14F

requ

en

cy

Wait time between registration and chart up (minutes)

Before

After

Page 29: Quality Improvement in Action

Limitations of Data

• Problem with first set of outcome data

• Biases towards time of data collection

Page 30: Quality Improvement in Action

What to do next

Page 31: Quality Improvement in Action

Initial Changes

• Continue using implemented changes

• Refine initial changes

• Registration forms included on clipboards

• Timing of collection of registration forms

• Consider the sustainability of these changes

Page 32: Quality Improvement in Action

Reduce Interruptions to Flow

• Changes in outgoing message • Internal Instant Messaging system

Page 33: Quality Improvement in Action

Technology to Reduce Steps Reduce Steps Through Technology

• Different avenues for chart requests • Use of new EMR system

Page 34: Quality Improvement in Action

What Else?