Al Amal Hospital: Fall Prevention Strategy

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Click Here To Order Now!

Introduction

Patient safety is a significant aspect in the delivery of quality care in a patient-centered care system. It is defined as the prevention of harm to patients while placing more emphasis on delivering care that minimizes or stops errors from happening and learn from previous mistakes to avoid the same in the future (Kulinski et al., 2017). Therefore, in essence, patient safety articulates measures that a healthcare organization can develop and implement within the hospital setting to protect its patients from errors, injuries, infections, and accidents. According to a report by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, patient falls are observed as the most common cause of patient injuries, principally in elderly patients (as cited in White et al., 2016). While most of these falls are not intentional, some of such cases can be averted. This report identifies measures that can be implemented by Al Amal Hospital to mitigate patient falls using U-control charts with lower and upper control limits and the mean of ±3 standard deviations.

Background

Falls are becoming an increasingly significant concern in the healthcare sector. As stated in a published survey by the World Health Organization (WHO), many patient falls are preventable in more advanced countries (as cited in Kulinski et al., 2017). Most of these falls are not influenced by poor performance or negligence by the care providing staff but occur because of a lack of effective mitigation strategies in their functional designs. Due to the high costs associated with falls, it is vital to determine strategies that can reduce injuries related to patient care (Florence, 2018). In the United States, patient falls that occur accidentally account for a substantial number of nonfatal injuries associated with older people (Kulinski et al., 2017). Patients above the age of 60 tend to be most vulnerable to the condition.

Objectives of the Study

Al Amal is a general hospital with a bed capacity of 300. On January 1, 2009, healthcare management introduced an obligatory incident conveying scheme and a fall prevention program two years later. The data on patient falls, the number of discharges, and occupied bed days per month for January 2009 through December 2011 was provided. In this sense, the study aims at identifying measures that can be put in place to prevent patient falls using a U-control chart with lower and upper control limits and a mean of ±3 standard deviations.

The Need for a Control Chart in Falls Prevention

In most cases, the financial spending used in treating and containing falls is excessive. Citing from a report by White et al. (2016), a larger proportion of patients treated for wounds and damages associated with falls account for 15 percent of hospital admissions. Implementation of an effective fall prevention program for patient safety will help patients, their families, and society to minimize the unnecessary spending of funds to treat the condition (White et al., 2016). Therefore, incorporating U-charts as a prevention mechanism is an effective strategy to help fall patients manage their anxiety and reduce their inactiveness. Successful implementation of this program will ensure that patients have a clear understanding of their surroundings, become more fit by undertaking numerous physical activities and attain balance, thereby reducing the prevalence of falls.

Reasons for Selecting the U-Chart

Notably, the U-chart was the most appropriate control chart for this report. This is because it is mostly utilized when monitoring the proportion of unconventionality regarding samples of units obtained from a condition such as falls based on days, months, and weeks. Suman & Prajapati (2018) assert that it is crucial in this report because it purposely examines a single unit for a nonconformity. It is a simple graphical tool that facilitates the monitoring of process performance. Its design assists a researcher in determining the type of variation existing in a process. Moreover, they are not only simple to construct and interpret, but they also help highlight critical aspects of performance, which need further investigation.

Methodology

This report utilized the U-control chart to analyze the data from Al Amal Hospital. The study used the method of control carts in the analysis of the data. Control charts are an efficient method of analyzing performance data to assess a process (Smith, 2019). The study used the data to draw a U-chart after selecting the most appropriate type of chart and justifying the selection. A graph representing patient fall was also drawn, followed by the setting of the control limits. The use of the control chart as a useful prevention tool can be evaluated based on the analysis. Data from 2009 to 2011 can be collected and analyzed to determine the effectiveness of this fall prevention program. In essence, data showing the number of patients’ falls recorded, the number of discharges, the number of hospital readmissions, and the number of fall-related readmissions will be significant for assessing the program.

Results and Discussions

  • The fall rates were calculated by dividing the number of falls by the number of occupied bed days in each month. For instance, the fall rate for January 2009 was:
    • Numbers of falls = 60 = 0.009803922
    • Number of occupied bed days 6120
  • The average fall rate was calculated by dividing the sum of all the fall rate by the total number of occupied bed days
    • Sum of fall rate = Average
    • Sum of occupied bed days
  • The standard deviation was calculated as follows:
    • SD = SQRT([Average] / [Number of occupied bed days])
  • The upper and lower control limits were calculated with a mean of ±3 standard deviations as follows.
    • UCL = [Average] + 3*[Standard Deviation]
    • LCL = [Average] – 3*[Standard Deviation]

The results of the calculations of fall rates, averages, standard deviation, and upper and lower control limits are presented in the table below.

Month Number of occupied bed days Numbers of falls Fall rate Average Standard Deviation UCL LCL
Jan 6120 60 0.009803922 0.007677978 0.001120077 0.011038208 0.004317748
Feb 7192 51 0.007091212 0.007677978 0.001033234 0.010777679 0.004578277
Mar 6556 73 0.011134838 0.007677978 0.001082191 0.010924551 0.004431405
Apr 4979 33 0.006627837 0.007677978 0.001241802 0.011403384 0.003952572
May 5534 42 0.007589447 0.007677978 0.001177888 0.011211641 0.004144315
Jun 6493 69 0.010626829 0.007677978 0.001087429 0.010940264 0.004415692
Jul 5020 21 0.004183267 0.007677978 0.001236721 0.01138814 0.003967816
Aug 5147 50 0.009714397 0.007677978 0.001221367 0.01134208 0.004013876
Sep 5071 42 0.00828239 0.007677978 0.001230486 0.011369436 0.00398652
Oct 4432 20 0.004512635 0.007677978 0.001316205 0.011626593 0.003729363
Nov 5496 43 0.007823872 0.007677978 0.001181953 0.011223836 0.00413212
Dec 4128 33 0.007994186 0.007677978 0.001363809 0.011769405 0.003586551
Jan 6328 77 0.012168142 0.007677978 0.001101514 0.010982521 0.004373435
Feb 5895 45 0.007633588 0.007677978 0.001141252 0.011101734 0.004254222
Mar 5084 59 0.011605035 0.007677978 0.001228912 0.011364713 0.003991243
Apr 6799 76 0.011178114 0.007677978 0.001062676 0.010866006 0.00448995
May 9820 63 0.006415479 0.007677978 0.000884235 0.010330683 0.005025273
Jun 8021 89 0.011095873 0.007677978 0.000978384 0.010613129 0.004742827
Jul 9786 107 0.010933987 0.007677978 0.00088577 0.010335287 0.005020669
Aug 8123 78 0.009602364 0.007677978 0.000972221 0.010594642 0.004761314
Sep 9178 99 0.010786664 0.007677978 0.000914638 0.010421893 0.004934063
Oct 6120 123 0.020098039 0.007677978 0.001120077 0.011038208 0.004317748
Nov 7192 118 0.016407119 0.007677978 0.001033234 0.010777679 0.004578277
Dec 6546 129 0.019706691 0.007677978 0.001083017 0.01092703 0.004428926
Jan 6388 42 0.006574828 0.007677978 0.001096329 0.010966966 0.00438899
Feb 5875 32 0.005446809 0.007677978 0.001143193 0.011107557 0.0042484
Mar 5084 29 0.00570417 0.007677978 0.001228912 0.011364713 0.003991243
Apr 6799 21 0.00308869 0.007677978 0.001062676 0.010866006 0.00448995
May 6820 16 0.002346041 0.007677978 0.001061039 0.010861094 0.004494862
Jun 7021 12 0.001709158 0.007677978 0.001045741 0.0108152 0.004540756
Jul 6786 11 0.001620984 0.007677978 0.001063694 0.010869059 0.004486898
Aug 8111 10 0.001232894 0.007677978 0.00097294 0.010596799 0.004759157
Sep 9163 11 0.00120048 0.007677978 0.000915387 0.010424138 0.004931818
Oct 7534 9 0.001194585 0.007677978 0.00100951 0.010706508 0.004649448
Nov 6493 12 0.001848144 0.007677978 0.001087429 0.010940264 0.004415692
Dec 7020 10 0.001424501 0.007677978 0.001045815 0.010815423 0.004540533

The U-control chart below was obtained based on the calculated data, revealing that the highest number of falls was experienced in 2010, with the highest fall rate of 0.02 recorded in October and December. On the contrary, the lowest number of falls was observed in 2011 between Augusts and December. Based on the data, there are outliers and special cause variation within the analysis because the graph is not in control, considering that some of the monthly data are recorded outside the centraline. For instance, in 2010, outliers were observed in January, March, April, June, July, September, October, November, and December, with October having the maximum outlier range of 0.02. Similarly, there were outliers in 2011 from April to December with August, September, and October, each having the minimum outlier range of 0.001.

Additionally, special cause variation was evident because of the abnormal increase in the rate of falls. For example, in 2010, the fall rate suddenly increased in October, November, and December at high values of 0.02, 0.017, and 0.019, respectively, that broadly vary from the zero target. Notably, the abnormalities occurred because some deviations made the control limits to be surpassed. On the other hand, the fall prevention program’s implementation caused another special cause variation from April to December of 2011. This impact is evidenced by the sudden drop of the fall rates below the center line and below the lower control limit to a minimum value of 0.001 in August, September, and October. This positive change is good since it aligns with the objective of reducing the fall rate towards the zero point at Al Amal Hospital.

On that note, the outliers and special cause variation imply the need for Al Amal Hospital to adjust its control limits. Citing from Saghir & Lin (2015), this approach will help the hospital accurately determine when the control chart strategy becomes unstable towards fall prevention when it lands outside the control limits. Furthermore, the special cause variation means that the hospital must investigate its control limits and make appropriate corrections to improve the U-control chart’s effectiveness. Besides, this signals the hospital’s urgency to develop an unpredictable factor in the control chart that has not yet been accounted for by the current control limits to reach the target, which is zero.

Fall Prevention Strategy

Conclusion

This report determines measures that can be put in place to prevent patient falls using a U-control chart with lower and upper control limits and a mean of ±3 standard deviations. The U-control charts analysis reveals that there were outliers and a special cause variation because all the graphs were not control considering that some of the monthly data were recorded outside the centraline. Furthermore, deviations were observed in the variables, thereby surpassing the control limits.

References

Florence, C. S., Bergen, G., Atherly, A., Burns, E., Stevens, J., & Drake, C. (2018). . Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 66(4), 693-698.

Kulinski, K., DiCocco, C., Skowronski, S., & Sprowls, P. (2017). . Frontiers in public health, 5, 4.

Saghir, A., & Lin, Z. (2015). Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 31(5), 725-739.

Smith, E. S. (2019). Introduction to statistical quality control. (2 ed). London: Oxford University Press

Suman, G., & Prajapati, D. (2018). . International Journal of Metrology and Quality Engineering, 9, 5.

White, K. M., Dudley-Brown, S., & Terhaar, M. F. (2016). Translation of evidence into nursing and health care. (1 ed.). Springer Publishing Company.

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Click Here To Order Now!