Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T18:07:27.647Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A workshop to improve workflow efficiency in emergency medicine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2015

Raghu Venugopal ,
Eddy Lang ,
Ken Doyle ,
Douglas Sinclair ,
Bernard Unger  and
Marc Afilalo
Raghu Venugopal*
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, Que.
Eddy Lang
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, Que.
Ken Doyle
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, Que.
Douglas Sinclair
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS
Bernard Unger
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, Que.
Marc Afilalo
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, Que.
*
McGill University Emergency Medicine Program, Royal Victoria Hospital, Rm. A4.62, 687 Pine Ave. W, Montréal QC H3A 1A1; [email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective:

The emergency department (ED) environment requires physicians to focus on workflow efficiency (WFE) and manage ED throughput. We sought to determine whether an interactive workshop could be designed and favourably perceived by emergency physicians and residents as a means to improve their self-assessed WFE skills.

Methods:

The authors designed a 4-station workshop to simulate key components of ED throughput. These included resource management in 1) acute care, 2) minor care, 3) charting and 4) communication skills and patient sign-overs. Anonymous surveys were completed after each workshop using 5-point Likert scales and qualitative responses. Qualitative data encompassed participants' past WFE training experiences and perspectives on the current workshop. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. The workshops were administered on 2 separate occasions to different groups of physicians. The first occasion was primarily for residents and the second session was only for practising physicians.

Results:

A total of 22 residents and 24 practising physicians participated. Evaluations were completed by 45 of 46 participants. Ratings of “definitely helpful” or “helpful” as noted for each station were received by 37 of 44 respondents for the sign-over and communication station, by 37 of 44 for the minor care station, by 41 of 44 for the acute care station and by 33 of 43 for the effective charting station. Among all participants, 42 of 45 reported that they felt the overall workshop experience was “helpful” or “definitely helpful.”

Conclusion:

ED management “flow skills” are valued yet undertaught. A flow workshop designed to improve self-perceived WFE skills yields positive evaluations. Teaching this competency in a workshop setting is both feasible and appreciated by participants. Similar efforts should be considered for inclusion in both graduate and continuing medical education curricula.

Keywords

patient flowphysician practiceemergency department overcrowding
Type
Education • Enseignment
Information
Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine , Volume 10 , Issue 6 , November 2008 , pp. 525 - 531
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 2008

References

1.Hockberger, RS, Binder, LS, Graber, MA. 2007 Model of the clinical practice of emergency medicine. Chicago (IL): Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education; 2007. Available: http://www.acgme.org/acWebsite/RRC_110/110_clinModel.pdf (accessed 2008 Oct 1).Google Scholar
2.Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Objectives of training and specialty training requirements in emergency medicine. Ottawa (ON): The College; 2007. Available: http://rcpsc.medical.org/information/index.php?specialty=122&submit=Select (accessed 2008 Oct 1).Google Scholar
3.Apker, J, Mallak, LA, Gibson, SC. Communicating in the “gray zone”: perceptions about emergency physician-hospitalist handoffs and patient safety. Acad Emerg Med 2007;14:884–94.Google ScholarPubMed
4.DeBehnke, DJ, O’Brien, S, Leschke, R, et al.Emergency medicine resident work productivity and efficiency in an academic emergency department. Acad Emerg Med 1999;6:90–2.Google Scholar
5.Dowd, MD, Tarantino, C, Barnett, TM, et al.Resident efficiency in a pediatric emergency department. Acad Emerg Med 2005;12:1240–4.Google Scholar
6.Campbell, SG, Sinclair, DE. Strategies for managing a busy emergency department. CJEM 2004;6:271–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Denny, CJ, Steinhart, BD, Yu, R. Improving physician flow and efficiency in the emergency department. CJEM 2003;5:271–4.Google Scholar
8.American College of Emergency Physicians. Efficiency in the emergency department. Dallas (TX): The College; 2004. Available: http://www.acep.org/practres.aspx?id=29876 (accessed 2008 Oct 1).Google Scholar
9.Singer, JI, Dean, J. Emergency physician intershift handovers. Pediatr Emerg Care 2006;22:751–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Khare, R, Reinhardt, G. Preparing ED residents to manage patient flow patterns using computer simulation models. Acad Emerg Med 2006;13:S208.Google Scholar