Clinical Audit is a method of confirming the quality of clinical services and identify the need for improvement. A skill hospital administrator should learn and practice.
1. What is clinical audit?
Clinical audit is a quality improvement process that
seeks to improve patient care and outcomes
through systematic review of care against explicit
criteria and the implementation of change.
This definition is endorsed by the National Institute
for Clinical Excellence.
3. Preparing for audit
Selecting criteria
Measuring performance
Making improvements
Sustaining improvement
Using
Methods
Creating
Environment
4. Patients
•Improve quality of Care
•Improve Patient satisfaction
•Improve Patient Confidence in care delivery
HCO
•Improve out come of services
•Cost Effective Care
•Improve Brand Value
•Improve Bottom line
HCP
•Provide workable Standards
•Identify Training Needs
•Measure quality of care
•Solve Problems
•Ensure Appropriate Use of Resources
5. 1. Failure to participate and attitudes to audit
Those involved in organising audit programmes must consider various methods
of engaging the full participation of all health service staffs
2. Failure to provide a supportive environment for audit
Successful clinical audit requires the organisation to promote a culture in which audit
is supported and actively encouraged.
3. Lack of training in audit methodology and evidence-
based skills
Health professionals and audit support staff require adequate knowledge and skills for
undertaking audit and are keen to learn.
4. Cost:
High cost of conducting audit . It should be made cost effective.
6. Selecting a topic:
General guideline-Select topic of high risk
process, Seroius quality problem,
clinical evidence or guideline is available
1. Structure of organisation –
Man: Nurse Patient Ratio, Un authorised
absence,
Machine : Critical equipment down time,
Machine failure
Materials : Adequacy of Emergency drugs,
Stock out of drugs,
7. 2. PROCESS:
1. Initial Assessment
2. Periodic Assessment
3. PAC
4. Prophylactic Antibiotic
5. Rational use of antibiotic for Pneumonia,UTI,SSI,
Meningitis etc
6. Appropriate use of Blood components
7. Appropriate use of sedatives/Narcotics
8. Appropriate Pain control – Post surgical
9. Hand Hygiene Compliance
10. Effective CPR compliance
11. Bundles Compliance
12. Readmission
13. Medication error,Adverse effects of High Alert drugs
8. 3. Out Come:
Look for complications ,patients safety like :
1. Mortality of DRG
2. Ventilator mortality
3. Acute MI Mortality
4. Primary Angioplasty mortality
5. HAI
6. Pressure Ulcer
9. Explicit rather than implicit criteria should be preferred.
. Criteria should be derived from good-quality guidelines or from
reviews of the evidence.
Selected research evidence confirms that clinical care processes
have an influence on outcome, measurement of the process of
care is generally more sensitive and provides a direct measure of
the quality of care.
. Measurement of outcome can be used to identify problems in
care, provided outcomes are clear, influenced by process, and
occur within a short period.
10. . Adjustment for case mix is generally required for
comparing the outcomes of different providers.
. If the criteria incorporate, or are based on, the views
of professionals or other groups, formal consensus
methods are preferable.
. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether it
is necessary to set target levels of performance in
audit. However, reference to levels achieved in audits
undertaken by other professionals is useful.
. In some audits, benchmarking techniques could help
participants in audit to avoid setting unnecessarily low
or unrealistically high target levels of
performance.
12. A systematic approach to implementation appears to be more effective. Such
an approach includes the identification of local barriers to change, the
support of teamwork, and the use of a variety of specific methods.
PDSA is an effecting tool for management.
Non
Compliance
Standard to
be achieved
Target Time Persons
responsible
Review
13. 1. What
Changes are
to be made
2. Next Cycle
?
1.Objective
2. Predictions
3.Plan for data
collections
4.. Four W
1..Carry out
plan
2.Documents
Observation
3.Record Data
1. Analysis Data
2. Compare
results to
prediction /
bench mark
3.Summary of
out come
PLAN
DO
STUDY
ACT
14. Improvements in care implemented as a part of clinical audit
must be monitored, evaluated, sustained, and reinforced within
a supportive environment.
Structures and systems must be developed to enable
organisations to integrate improvements within a planned
strategy.
15. A clinical audit of cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
McIntyre AS, et al. J R Coll Physicians Lond. 1993.
The structure, process and outcome of cardiopulmonary resuscitation
(CPR) at one hospital have been reviewed to determine where failings
in the system could be improved, whether the existing training
programme was adequate and well directed, and whether survival
rates were reasonable
. The audit revealed a need to improve telephone connections to the
hospital switchboard, modify some equipment, and improve
knowledge of the geography of the hospital site. Changes in emphasis
in the training programme will alter the process of resuscitation.
Outcome measures indicate that survival figures are comparable with
published data, including recent data which act as a benchmark for
quality control
16. An audit of documented preoperative evaluation of surgery patient
The aim of the study was to audit the documented preoperative
anaesthetic evaluations of surgery patients
Methods: For this retrospective study a sample of 81 patients, who
openedunderwent surgery during May 2013, was randomly
selected. The information obtained from the standardised PAR form
in each patient’s file was audited using a self-generated checklist,
based on the measures and criteria incorporated in the Global
Quality Index
18. Objective : To measure compliance of HCP with elements of VAP Bundles
Evidence of quality
care
(criterion)
Standard
( % of Compliance )
Exceptions Definitions &
Instruction for data
collection
Elevation of head of
bed 30-45 degrees
100% Spinal Injury All ventilated Adult
patients in ICU
Oral hygeine with
chlorhexidine
100% Oropharyngeal
Trauma
All ventilated Adult
patients in ICU
Hand Hygiene 100% NONE All ventilated Adult
patients in ICU
Circuit Change Only
When needed
100% NONE All ventilated Adult
patients in ICU
Sedation Review &
Vacation
100% HFO,High ICP,Difficult
to ventilate
All ventilated Adult
patients in ICU
Subglottic Suction
ETT
100% Not Available All ventilated Adult
patients in ICU
TABLE :AUDIT STANDARDS & CRITERIA
19. 1. Data Collection from Medical Record
Table – Summary of Results
Evidence of quality
care
(criterion)
Exception Compliance Percentage
Elevation of head of
bed 30-45 degrees
3 81/85 95.2
Oral hygeine with
chlorhexidine
Zero 88/88 100
Hand Hygiene Zero 77/88 87.5
Circuit Change Only
When needed
Zero 88/88 100
Sedation Review &
Vacation
1 57/88 65.5
Subglottic Suction
ETT
88 0/88 0
21. The audit report should follow a standard audit report template. For example:
Introduction
Explain the reasoning why the audit was undertaken.
Outline when the audit undertaken and how many people/items were surveyed.
Outline the aims and objectives of the audit.
Method and Sample
Briefly explain the method used and how the sample was chosen.
This section should include enough detail to allow anyone re-auditing to use the
same approach and methodology.
It should include: Who was involved; what type of data collection tool or scale was
used; any difficulties experienced; timescales and any expectations
22. Results
There should be no commentary in this section.
Anonymity should be heeded i.e. don’t refer to
specific people.
Where possible use visual aids such as tables or
charts. All tables and figures
should have a title and be understood without
reference to the text.
Be consistent with data presentation, e.g. decimal
places, percentages, format.
23. Discussion
This section should not contain any new data.
It should draw on the results and make careful
interpretation of the findings.
Compare the results to other audits.
Discuss the strengths and weakness of the
audit, are there any discrepancies?
Discuss the meaning of the findings and possible
implications for health care
professionals.
24. Conclusion and recommendations :
Use this section to summarise.
Put forward recommendations for change, for
example, better documentation, training
requirements, change of practice.
Recommendations should be realistic and
achievable.
Suggest areas for further works and plans for re-
audit if appropriate.
25. TAKE HOME MESSAGE
1. Keep audits simple
2. Get everyone involved
3. Determine the topic
4. Have a plan
5. Do not confuse clinical audit
with research
6. Do not collect needless data
26. 7. Take care with statistics – errors can lead
to inaccurate
conclusions
8. Close all clinical audit loops
9. Keep data only for as long as it is needed
10. Share learning - tell everyone about your
audit
11. Tell ‘The Organisation’ about your audit
12. Re-audit to ensure improvement in
clinical care
Notes de l'éditeur
Aspects of the structure, processes, and outcomes of care are selected and systematically evaluated against explicit criteria. Where indicated, changes are implemented at an individual, team, or service level and further monitoring is used to confirm improvement in healthcare delivery
Examples of using these are: . to improve the blood transfusion processes within the trust . to increase the proportion of patients with hypertension whose blood pressure is controlled . to ensure that every infant has access to immunisation against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio, influenza B, and meningitis C before 6 months of age
Others :food and nutrition
. personal and oral hygiene
. continence and bladder and bowel care
. pressure ulcers
. record keeping
. safety of clients/patients with mental health needs in acute mental health and general
hospital settings
. privacy and dignity.
. bladder and bowel care
. eating and drinking
. communication
. controlling pain and discomfort
. safety
. promoting independence.
What is Criterion-A definable and measurable item of healthcare which describes quality and which can be used
to assess it (Irvine and Irvine, 1991)
What is standard ? . The level of care to be achieved for any particular criterion (Irvine and Irvine, 1991)
Developing valid criteria
Once a topic has been chosen, valid criteria must be selected. For criteria to be valid
and lead to improvements in care, they need to be:
. based on evidence
. related to important aspects of care
. measurable
Make data collection as easy as possible.
Excel sheet can be used
Exception should be included.
Time Frame should be defined
Accuracy of data should be ensured
Appropriate Sample size
Can be retospective or concurrent.
. In the first seven months 143 reports were received; 49% of them were cardiac, 17% respiratory, and 24% mixed cardiorespiratory arrests. Overall, immediate survival was 43% of those with cardiorespiratory arrests. Seventy per cent of the immediate survivors were alive at 24 hours, and 69% of them survived to six weeks or beyond. The most important indicator for a successful outcome was the heart rhythm at the time of the resuscitation team's arrival, with 71% surviving from ventricular fibrillation, 20% surviving from apparent asystole, and only 9% surviving from electromechanical dissociation. No patient with the latter two rhythms survived to six weeks or left hospital. Neither the location or time of the arrest, nor the patient's age influenced the immediate survival. The audit revealed a need to improve telephone connections to the hospital switchboard, modify some equipment, and improve knowledge of the geography of the hospital site. Changes in emphasis in the training programme will alter the process of resuscitation. Outcome measures indicate that survival figures are comparable with published data, including recent data which act as a benchmark for quality control.
Results: Although 100% of files retrieved contained the PAR form, none of these forms were fully completed according to the study checklist used. Criteria where less than 50% were completed correctly included: ‘per os’ status (1.2%), current medication (37.0%), preoperative diagnosis (38.3%), preoperative vital signs (43.2%), American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Classification (44.4%), airway assessment (45.7%), anaesthetic history and complications (48.2%) and special investigation results (49.4%).
Conclusions: The documented preoperative evaluations were incomplete with regard to a number of criteria, as also found in studies conducted at two other national institutions. Training and evaluation regarding completion of preoperative assessment of patients by anaesthetists is needed at Universitas Academic Hospital.