rss
Qual Saf Health Care 2002;11:300 doi:10.1136/qhc.11.3.300
  • Action points

ACTION POINTS

  1. Tim Albert

      Compiled by Tim Albert

      Q: WHAT DO YOU LEARN WHEN YOU DO A SECOND AUDIT FIVE YEARS AFTER THE FIRST?

      A team of investigators were able to compare audits on treatment for hip fractures carried out in seven hospitals in East Anglia, UK in 1992 and 1997. They found a number of changes. Pharmaceutical thromboembolic prophylaxis had gone up from 45% to 81% and early mobilisation from 56% to 70%. Cases of pneumonia, wound infection, pressure sores, and fatal pulmonary embolism had gone down. Functional outcomes (at 3 months) and mortality had not improved. Some hospitals were doing better in some areas, but others were doing worse. “This highlights the need for continuous quality improvement by repeating the audit cycle to reach and then improve standards”, write the authors. They identify rehabilitation and long term support as key …

      [Full text of this article]

      This Article

      1. Extract
      2. Full text
      3. PDF

      Responses

      1. Submit a response
      2. No responses published

      Register for free content

      The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

      Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.