Improving patient throughput for oral day case surgery. The efficacy of a nurse-led pre-admission clinic

Clark, Katherine; Voase, Richard; Fletcher, I.R.; Thomson, Peter

doi:10.1016/s0966-6532(98)00053-5

Cited by 16 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Pre-assessment, did-not-attend or cancellation rate Several reports on the evaluation of pre-assessment services highlight the need to audit the did-not-attend (DNA) and cancellation rates (Dunn 1998, Clark et al 1999, 2000, Green 2000, Sexton 2003, Le et al 2007. In a cost-driven NHS, the rationale for such evaluation is obvious; DNAs and cancelled operations mean that ward, nursing, medical and theatre resources are underused and that time and money are wasted.…”

Section: Featurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pre-operative assessment is often cited as a way of reducing the DNA and cancellation rates on the day of surgery (Vowles et al 1997, Clark et al 1999, Samuel and Ranta 2001. This seems logical given that, if children are seen before surgery, social, psychological and physical problems can be identified and managed before admission.…”

Section: Featurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the literature on this matter is far from conclusive. For example, Vowles et al (1997) and Clark et al (1999) found that about 30 per cent of children who were pre-assessed were unsuitable for day-case surgery or no longer needed treatment, thereby illustrating how pre-assessments can save time and money. Meanwhile Craig's (2005) systematic review to determine if nurse-led pre-operative assessment reduces the cancellation rate of elective surgery was inconclusive, although it is worth noting that the methodology used in Craig's review was unclear.…”

Section: Featurementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Pre-assessment for children scheduled for day surgery

Higson

Finlay²

2010

Nursing Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reports on an evaluation of a established pre-assessment clinic for children scheduled for day surgery. The results suggest that the pre-assessment clinic increases the efficiency and effectiveness of the admissions process for children. The authors discuss the results in detail and make recommendations for further research and nursing practice. They suggest, for example, that evaluative research can provide a framework for assessing new services.

show abstract

Section: Featurementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Featurementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Featurementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pre-assessment for children scheduled for day surgery

Higson

Finlay²

2010

Nursing Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, extended roles and the gaining of pre-assessment skills both embrace devolved medical tasks (23,26,38,(61)(62)(63)(64)(65) . Unfortunately, the exposition of nursing knowledge is again not considered although some studies have demonstrated the value of nursing skills in the pre-assessment clinic (39,66) .…”

Section: E T H O D O L O G Y L I T E R a T U R E R E V I E Wmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nursing knowledge and the expansion of day surgery in the United Kingdom

Mitchell

2006

Ambulatory Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, please contact the Repository Team at: usir@salford.ac.uk. N u r s i n g K n o w l e d g e a n d t h e E x p a n s i o n o f D a y S u r g e r y i n t h e U n i t e d K i n g d o m . AbstractBackground: The amount of surgery undertaken within United Kingdom Day Surgery Units has risen considerably over the past 15 -20 years. Throughout this pioneering era, nursing roles and responsibilities within the modern surgical environment have developed although have largely shadowed medical advances. Thereby, evidence based nursing knowledge appears to have contributed very little to the recent success of day surgery. This may be due, in part, to the lack of attention given to modern surgical practices within current preregistration nurse education programmes of study.Aim: The aim of this educational audit was to evaluate the consideration given to modern surgical practices in the programmes of study of recently qualified staff nurses employed within Day Surgery Units in the United Kingdom in order to gauge the extent of the challenge.Method: A postal audit was designed and sent to n=247 Day Surgery Units. The audit was intended to elicit information from the Staff Nurses regarding their experiences of modern, elective day surgery during their nurse education programmes of study.Results: Two hundred and seventy seven staff nurses responded revealing that the level of attention to day surgery practices within pre-registration programmes was extremely low. The Professions' actual and potential theoretical contribution to modern surgical practices was virtually nil. Their experience of pre-operative nursing intervention appeared mainly to involve the teaching of traditional surgical in-patients nursing skills. Additionally, the inclusion of modern surgical practices into the theoretical assignments within the programmes of study was very limited. Moreover, once qualified, the vast majority of staff nurses experienced no additional formal education for their new role. Conclusions:The results are discussed in relation to the re-focusing of pre-registration nurse education, changing clinical roles and the future of nursing within the modern surgical arena. D a y S u r g e r y : A N e w E r a o f S u r g i c a l N u r s i n g I n t e r v e n t i o n .

show abstract

“…Akosah et al (2002), Aragon et al (2002), Bachtel and Lyle (1992), Banerjee and Rhoden (1998), Bhatti et al (1999), Bluth et al (1992), Browne et al (2000), Cain et al (1996), Calland et al (2001), Cameron et al (2002), Caplan et al (1998, 1999), Challis et al (1991), Chandler (1994), Chimner and Easterling (1993), Claesson et al (2000), Clark et al (1999), Clow et al (2002), Cooke et al (2002), Cornwell et al (2003), Czuchry et al (2000), Dutton et al (2003), Fernandes and Christenson (1995), Fernandes et al (1996, 1997), Gamon et al (2002), Gebran (1994), Gilutz et al (1998), Goering and Wilson (2002), Grimes (2000), Hashimoto and Bell (1996), Hattam and Smeatham (1999), Hernandez et al (2003), Holland (1995), Huarng and Lee (1996), Huber et al (1998), Hunter et al (1993), Hypnar and Anderson (2001), Inturrisi and Lambert (1998), Jackson and Andrew (1996), Jano and Harlin (2000), Johnson and McCargar (1999), Kerr and Kavanagh (2002), Keyes and Biedron (1995), Kossovsky et al (2002), Kyriacou et al (1999), Landi et al (1999, 2001), Larsen et al (1994), Lewis and Wilner (1989), Mayo et al (1996), McRobbie et al (2003), Meyer et al (2002), Miró et al (2003), Monagle et al (2003), Moon et al (2001), New (2000), Newell et al (1998), Olivotto et al (2001), Patel et al (2001), Patterson et al (1997), Pell et al (1992), Petersen et al (1997), Prasad et al (1997), Pritts et al (1999), Qasim et al (2002), Racine and Davidson (2002), Rupp and Doyle (1993), Ryan et al (1996), Sanz and Pomar (1998), …”

Section: Embase and Medlinementioning

confidence: 99%