Abstracts of the Trainee Conference 2023, 6–7 July 2023, Leeds, UK
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This quality-improvement project aimed to assess how well Whang arei Hospital (Northland, New Zealand) theatre staff knew the names of their colleagues, and whether introducing named scrub hats improved this.We also aimed to assess whether theatre staff supported this as an intervention.This intervention elsewhere has been shown to improve work efficiency [1], and may engender trust and a strong work ethic.Furthermore, there is evidence that improved communication improves patient outcomes [2]. MethodsIn 2021, questionnaires were self-completed by operating theatre staff.These asked them if they were able to name the colleagues who worked with them on that day.Later that year, named scrub hats were then provided to the entire anaesthetic department, as well as to most theatre nurses, surgeons and anaesthetic technicians.Two months following this intervention, the same questionnaires were completed by staff to assess whether name recall had improved.Theatre staff were also asked on both occasions whether they supported the use of named scrub hats as a means to improve communication. ResultsThirty-eight staff members completed the initial questionnaires.Responses were from surgeons (n = 6), anaesthetists (n = 11), anaesthetic technicians (n = 7) and nurses (n = 14).Respondents knew 85% of colleagues by name in their particular theatre.Eighty-four per cent of respondents thought the named caps were a good idea.Twenty staff members completed the post-intervention questionnaires.Responses were from surgeons (n = 2), anaesthetists (n = 8), anaesthetic technicians (n = 6) and nurses (n = 4).Respondents knew 91% of colleagues by name in their particular theatre.Eighty-five per cent of respondents thought the named caps were a good idea.Nurses knew 100% of the names of their colleagues (compared to 95.6% prior).Anaesthetists' name recall increased from 76% to 95% following this intervention. DiscussionDespite being less than the desired 100%, name recall was significantly better than anticipated.This was likely due to the small size of Whang arei Hospital in comparison to similar projects undertaken in UK hospitals.Post-intervention, anaesthetists had their names recalled 100% of the time (note all anaesthetists had named hats).The scrub cap intervention is well supported by theatre staff.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».