IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0220011.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interprofessional teamwork versus fast track streaming in an emergency department—An observational cohort study of two strategies for enhancing the throughput of orthopedic patients presenting limb injuries or back pain

Author

Listed:
  • Jenny Liu
  • Italo Masiello
  • Sari Ponzer
  • Nasim Farrokhnia

Abstract

Objective: To compare two strategies, interprofessional teams versus fast track streaming, for orthopedic patients with limb injuries or back pain, the most frequent orthopedic complaints in an emergency department. Methods: An observational before-and-after study at an adult emergency department from May 2012 to Nov 2015. Patients who arrived on weekdays from 8 am to 9 pm and presented limb injury or back pain during one year of each process were included, so that 11,573 orthopedic presentations were included in the fast track period and 10,978 in the teamwork period. Similarly, another 11,020 and 10,760 arrivals presenting the six most frequent non-orthopedic complaints were included in the respective periods, altogether 44,331 arrivals. The outcome measures were the time to physician (TTP) and length of stay (LOS). The LOS was adjusted for predictors, including imaging times, by using linear regression analysis. Results: The overall median TTP was shorter in the teamwork period, 76.3 min versus 121.0 min in the fast track period (-44.7 min, 95% confidence interval (CI): -47.3 to -42.6). The crude median LOS for orthopedic presentations was also shorter in the teamwork period, 217.0 min versus 230.0 min (-13.0 min, 95% CI: -18.0 to -8.0), and the adjusted LOS was 22.8 min shorter (95% CI: -26.9 to -18.7). For non-orthopedic presentations, the crude median LOS did not differ significantly between the periods (2.0 min, 95% CI: -3.0 to 7.0). However, the adjusted LOS was shorter in the teamwork period (-20.1 min, 95% CI: -24.6 to -15.7). Conclusions: The median TTP and LOS for orthopedic presentations were shorter in the teamwork period. For non-orthopedic presentations, the TTP and adjusted LOS were also shorter in the teamwork period. Therefore, interprofessional teamwork may be an alternative approach to improve the patient flow in emergency departments.

Suggested Citation

  • Jenny Liu & Italo Masiello & Sari Ponzer & Nasim Farrokhnia, 2019. "Interprofessional teamwork versus fast track streaming in an emergency department—An observational cohort study of two strategies for enhancing the throughput of orthopedic patients presenting limb in," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-16, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0220011
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0220011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0220011
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0220011&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0220011?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Julia Dinius & Rebecca Philipp & Nicole Ernstmann & Lina Heier & Anja S Göritz & Stefanie Pfisterer-Heise & Judith Hammerschmidt & Corinna Bergelt & Antje Hammer & Mirjam Körner, 2020. "Inter-professional teamwork and its association with patient safety in German hospitals—A cross sectional study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-15, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0220011. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.