Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T01:22:38.565Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A pilot study on the provision of tracheostomy healthcare and patient engagement in quality improvement measures: a global perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2019

C Swords*
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, North West Anglia NHS Foundation Trust, Peterborough, UK Global Tracheostomy Collaborative, London, UK
A Manji
Affiliation:
St George's Medical School, University of London, London, UK
E Ward
Affiliation:
Global Tracheostomy Collaborative, London, UK
A Arora
Affiliation:
Global Tracheostomy Collaborative, London, UK Department of Otolaryngology, Guy's and Saint Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
*
Author for correspondence: Miss Chloe Swords, Department of Otolaryngology, North West Anglia NHS Foundation Trust, Peterborough, UK E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Background

Work describing patient and family outcomes after tracheostomy has indicated that patients do not feel prepared at the time of discharge.

Objectives

To assess healthcare professional–patient interactions in tracheostomy care and the current provision of care.

Method

A global electronic survey was disseminated via e-mail.

Results

The majority of respondents were nursing or speech and language staff, from over 10 countries. Only 23 per cent of respondents’ institutions routinely offered patients the ability to meet people with a tracheostomy pre-operatively. Only 31 per cent consistently provided or co-ordinated full nursing and equipment requirements on discharge. Only half of the institutions participated in tracheostomy quality improvement initiatives; less than one-third of these involved patients.

Conclusion

The provision of tracheostomy care in hospital and at discharge can be improved. The current practice of clinician-led audit is becoming less viable; future initiatives should focus upon patient-centred outcomes to ensure excellence in healthcare delivery.

Type
Main Articles
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited, 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Miss C Swords takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

References

1McGrath, BA, Lynch, J, Bonvento, B, Wallace, S, Poole, V, Farrell, A et al. Evaluating the quality improvement impact of the Global Tracheostomy Collaborative in four diverse NHS hospitals. BMJ Qual Improv Rep 2017;6Google Scholar
2McCormick, ME, Ward, E, Roberson, DW, Shah, RK, Stachler, RJ, Brenner, MJ. Life after tracheostomy. Otolaryngol Neck Surg 2015;153:914–20Google Scholar
3Arora, A, Hettige, R, Ifeacho, S, Narula, A. Driving standards in tracheostomy care: a preliminary communication of the St Mary's ENT-led multi disciplinary team approach. Clin Otolaryngol 2008;33:596–9Google Scholar
4Mitchell, RB, Hussey, HM, Setzen, G, Jacobs, IN, Nussenbaum, B, Dawson, C et al. Clinical consensus statement: tracheostomy care. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2013;148:620Google Scholar
5Loerzel, VW, Crosby, WW, Reising, E, Sole, ML. Developing the Tracheostomy Care Anxiety Relief Through Education and Support (T-CARES) Program. Clin J Oncol Nurs 2014;18:522–7Google Scholar
6Robert, G, Cornwell, J, Locock, L, Purushotham, A, Sturmey, G, Gager, M. Patients and staff as codesigners of healthcare services. BMJ 2015;350:g7714Google Scholar
7Lord, L, Gale, N. Subjective experience or objective process: understanding the gap between values and practice for involving patients in designing patient-centred care. J Health Organ Manag 2014;28:714–30Google Scholar
8Streiner, D, Norman, G, Cairney, J. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use, 5th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016;294–5Google Scholar