The Impact on Work Patterns of Implementing the Save Sight Keratoconus Registry in the Hospital Setting.

Autor:	Ferdi AC; Discipline of Ophthalmology, The University of Sydney, Save Sight Institute, Sydney Medical School, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia., Nguyen V; Discipline of Ophthalmology, The University of Sydney, Save Sight Institute, Sydney Medical School, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia., Samarawickrama C; Department of Ophthalmology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; and., Hamilton A; Department of Ophthalmology, Sydney Eye Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia., Yeung S; Department of Ophthalmology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; and., Watson SL; Discipline of Ophthalmology, The University of Sydney, Save Sight Institute, Sydney Medical School, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Cornea [Cornea] 2020 Apr; Vol. 39 (4), pp. 451-456.
DOI:	10.1097/ICO.0000000000002159
Abstrakt:	Purpose: The adoption of clinical registries has the potential to improve outcomes, while reducing the costs of health care. We sought to evaluate the changes in workflow that occurred with implementation of the Save Sight Keratoconus Registry (SSKR) in corneal clinics. Methods: A prospective time-motion study and a clinician survey were conducted. The timing of clinic consultations was recorded before and after implementation of the SSKR. The activities were assigned into 3 main categories: 1) direct patient care (eg, talking to, examining), 2) indirect patient care (record keeping), and 3) indirect patient care (reading). Results: Overall, there was no change in average time spent per patient with or without the SSKR; 12.3 (5.3 SD) versus 12.1 (5.3 SD) minutes, respectively, P = 0.84. There was no change in time spent providing direct care with or without the SSKR; 5.4 (2.8 SD) versus 5.9 (2.8 SD) minutes, respectively, P = 0.51. Within direct patient care, there was no impact with or without the SSKR on the time spent examining (1.9 [1.0 SD] vs. 1.9 [1.4 SD] minutes, respectively, P = 0.58) or talking to patients (3.5 [2.3 SD] vs. 4.1 [2.3 SD] minutes, respectively, P = 0.21). Indirect care time was unchanged overall for record keeping (3.2 [2.2 SD] vs. 4.6 [2.9 SD], respectively, P = 0.16) and reading tasks (3.1 [1.8 SD] vs. 2.0 [1.3 SD], respectively, P = 0.09). Conclusions: The SSKR was implemented into clinical practice without affecting the total consultation time, time spent directly interacting with patients, or use of patient records. Our findings support that registries requiring data entry could be widely adopted into routine clinical practice.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu