Process-of-care failures common in adults with rectal bleeding

Process-of-care failures common in adults with rectal bleeding

(HealthDay)—Among adult primary care patients with rectal bleeding, process-of-care failures are frequent and are associated with poor or fair quality care, according to a study published in the January issue of The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety.

Saul N. Weingart, M.D., Ph.D., from Tufts Medical Center in Boston, and colleagues identified 438 patients with from 10 Boston adult primary care practices. Physician reviewers assessed the overall of care and key care processes following nurse chart abstraction. They examined the correlation of process failures with overall quality and guideline concordance.

The researchers judged the overall quality of care to be good or excellent in 77 percent of cases; however, in the workup of rectal bleeding, 71 percent of patients experienced at least one process-of-care failure. Clinicians failed to obtain an adequate family history, complete a pertinent physical exam, and order laboratory tests in 38, 23, and 16 percent of cases, respectively. The odds of poor or fair care were increased in association with failure to order or perform tests, or to make follow-up plans. There was little correlation between guideline concordance and quality judgements. One hundred twenty-eight delays could have been reduced or prevented.

"Educating practitioners and creating systems to ensure adequate history taking, physical examination, and processes for ordering, performing, and interpreting diagnostic tests may improve performance," the authors write.

Explore further

Physician volume may have a negative impact on quality of diabetes care

More information: Full Text

Copyright © 2017 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Citation: Process-of-care failures common in adults with rectal bleeding (2017, January 9) retrieved 19 September 2021 from
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

Feedback to editors