Mathematical modelling of patient risks in a hospital environment, using multiple regression analysis

The aim of this research work was primarily to examine the relevance of patient parameters, ward structures, procedures and practices, in respect of the potential hazards of wound cross-infection and nasal colonisation with multiple resistant strains of Staphylococcus aureus, which it is thought might provide a useful indication of a patient's general susceptibility to wound infection. Information from a large cross-sectional survey involving 12,000 patients from some 41 hospitals and 375 wards was collected over a five-year period from 1967-72, and its validity checked before any subsequent analysis was carried out. Many environmental factors and procedures which had previously been thought (but never conclusively proved) to have an influence on wound infection or nasal colonisation rates, were assessed, and subsequently dismissed as not being significant, provided that the standard of the current range of practices and procedures is maintained and not allowed to deteriorate. Retrospective analysis revealed that the probability of wound infection was influenced by the patient's age, duration of pre-operative hospitalisation, sex, type of wound, presence and type of drain, number of patients in ward, and other special risk factors, whilst nasal colonisation was found to be influenced by the patient's age, total duration of hospitalisation, sex, antibiotics, proportion of occupied beds in the ward, average distance between bed centres and special risk factors. A multi-variate regression analysis technique was used to develop statistical models, consisting of variable patient and environmental factors which were found to have a significant influence on the risks pertaining to wound infection and nasal colonisation. A relationship between wound infection and nasal colonisation was then established and this led to the development of a more advanced model for predicting wound infections, taking advantage of the additional knowledge of the patient's state of nasal colonisation prior to operation.

Support for paediatric prescribers:what is discussed at hospital board level?

Prescribing support tools range from traditional printed texts to state-of-the-art computerised decision support systems. Comparison between available literature is difficult due to country-specific resources often being the focus of the research. In the UK, it is widely accepted that hospitals take their own individualised approaches to reducing prescribing errors. Objective - This study focused on specialist paediatric hospitals. It aimed to identify the localised approaches taken by paediatric hospitals to reduce prescribing errors. Method - Applied thematic analysis was used to explore the publically published board meeting minutes from the four specialist stand-alone paediatric hospitals in England. Three years of data was collected from each hospital. Codes were collected into groups to identify themes from the data. Results - The main themes identified were clinician involvement in prescribing support is important; credit card-sized reminder tools are used to provide prescribing guidance; electronic prescribing is considered important for reducing prescribing errors; feedback from clinical pharmacists on prescribing errors is widely used; junior doctors require extra support when prescribing; medical records may be incomplete and specific prescribing support (eg, antibiotic prescribing support) is widely in use. Conclusions - There is no single collaborative approach taken to paediatric prescribing support in English paediatric hospitals. Success of electronic prescribing in English paediatric hospitals is considerably behind leaders such as the USA. Use of clinical pharmacists to support prescribers is important as supported by previous studies in Spain and the USA.