This study aims to develop and validate a questionnaire to assess workplace violence (WPV) domains in the healthcare setting.
MethodsThe study used a mixed-method design. In Phase 1, qualitative methods for developing the questionnaire were employed, including literature review, focus-group discussion, expert evaluation, and pre-testing. During Phase 2, quantitative methods were employed for establishing the construct validity of the questionnaire. In Phase 1, experts from departments like emergency medicine, medicine, obstetrics and gynecology, psychiatry, trauma, anesthesia, and critical care unit participated. For Phase 2, data were collected from 213 participants; mean age (30.48±5.95) in metropolitan cities.
ResultsThe questionnaire consists of 37 items in five domains: (A) Forms of violence, (B) Impact of violent incidences, (C) Reporting of incidence, (D) Mitigation strategies, and (E) Risk factors. The Cronbach's alpha value of the questionnaire is 0.86, suggesting an excellent internal consistency.
ConclusionA reliable and valid tool for gathering information regarding WPV in the healthcare system from around the world has been developed. The tool can be used to study the elements that may contribute to violence and its consequences, which will help policymakers curate various mitigation methods to safeguard WPV victims.
Acute abdominal pain is a common presentation to the emergency department (ED). Ruling out life-threatening causes and giving pain relief are the most important tasks in ED. We describe a 32-year-old man who presented to ED with abdominal pain and vomiting which was unrelieved by usual doses of analgesic. Extensive investigations revealed no significant abnormalities. On further probing, he admitted taking traditional medications for infertility. The toxicological panel revealed a high blood lead level, leading to a diagnosis of acute lead toxicity. Chelation therapy with D-penicillamine was initiated and the patient’s abdominal pain resolved within 4 days.
BackgroundST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is a highly time-sensitive and life-threatening condition. Early recognition and timely management are challenging in a busy emergency department (ED), especially in low/middle-income countries where emergency systems are often fragmented. The aim of our quality improvement (QI) project was to increase the percentage of patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with door to balloon (D2B) time of <90 min by 30% over 12 months.MethodsAs part of the first step in QI, baseline data were collected at different points in the process of care. Using process maps and fishbone analysis, delays in patient registration, ECG and communication with cardiology were identified as some bottlenecks, and change ideas were tested using plan–do–study–act cycles using point-of-care QI methodology. The majority of the change ideas focused on interventions in the ED like strengthening triage, training frontline staff, early diagnosis and quick transportation of patients.ResultsDuring the baseline phase, 22.22% of patients were found to have a D2B time of <90 min. We achieved an increase of 47.78% in patients receiving PCI within 90 min and hence increased to 70% at the end of the intervention phase. Data collected for 4 months after the intervention phase were found to have sustained the effort.ConclusionSignificant improvement in the door to reperfusion time resulted from a meticulous assessment of emergency care processes by drawing process flow chart and implementation of change ideas like introduction of fast-track policy for patients with chest pain, reducing staff turnover in the triage area, formal training of staff, continuous engagement with cardiology team and by interchanging of processes which led to a reduction in time to ECG.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.