RESULTS

-Initially, 97% of respondents reported significant problems with existing weekend phlebotomy provision.

- Doctors were spending a significant proportion of each shift identifying patients and taking bloods, at the expense of other tasks.

- The majority of respondents identified patient safety concerns or delayed discharge as a result of delays in or the absence of blood test results (Graph A).

- Following increased phlebotomy provision, all respondents surveyed felt the service had improved.

- Average time taking to bleed patients improved from 97 minutes to 47 minutes (Graph B).

- Further cycles are ongoing to maintain and continue improvementagainst changing needs of the hospital.

79% Improvement in junior doctor satisfaction with current provision

50 minute (48%) improvement in average time per doctor required to take bloods

Can you think of instances when patients not being bled led to patient safety issues or delayed discharge?

Graph A Graph B

Discussion Andconclusions

- There are significant challenges in providing optimum safe and efficient out-ofhours service, with limited resources. In a climate of increasing workload pressures, we are witnessing the impact of this on patient safety.

- This project was an excellent demonstration of a truly multi-disciplinary team working together to provide better patient care.

- Whilst this appears to be a cost-effective intervention that yielded measurable improvement, further work could include a cost-benefit analysis of employing additional phlebotomists balanced against timely patient discharges for those whose discharge was dependent on blood test results.

- Discussions with other local hospital trusts to share ideas for safer out-of-hours service provision could also be beneficial.

- A limitation of this data collection method is the self-selecting nature of the respondents.

Poster Competition Group N QI in Progress

Improving care pathways-2