British journal of nursing (Mark Allen Publishing) · 2024
Lymphoedema specialists embedded into community nurse and wound services: impacts and outcomes.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Thomas Melanie, Morgan Karen, Humphreys Ioan
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Lymphoedema is a progressive condition causing significant alterations to life, exerting pressures on unscheduled care from complications including cellulitis and wounds. An on the ground education programme (OGEP) was implemented to raise knowledge, competence and confidence in lymphoedema management in community clinical services. The aim of this study was to explore the impact and outcomes of the OGEP intervention.
METHODS: Data were captured before and after OGEP on 561 lymphoedema patients in the community setting. Data recorded included resource use, costs and outcomes (EQ-5D-5L and LYMPROM).
RESULTS: Data demonstrated statistically significant reductions in resource allocations including staff visits (P<0.001), cellulitis admissions (P<0.001), compression consumables and wound dressing costs (P<0.001). Overall, the total mean per patient cost decreased from £1457.10 to £964.40 (including intervention) with outcomes significantly improved in EQ-5D-5L/LYMPROM scores.
CONCLUSION: The analysis suggests the OGEP intervention may offer reductions in resource costs and improvements in patient outcomes. OGEP may therefore provide an innovative solution in future care delivery.
METHODS: Data were captured before and after OGEP on 561 lymphoedema patients in the community setting. Data recorded included resource use, costs and outcomes (EQ-5D-5L and LYMPROM).
RESULTS: Data demonstrated statistically significant reductions in resource allocations including staff visits (P<0.001), cellulitis admissions (P<0.001), compression consumables and wound dressing costs (P<0.001). Overall, the total mean per patient cost decreased from £1457.10 to £964.40 (including intervention) with outcomes significantly improved in EQ-5D-5L/LYMPROM scores.
CONCLUSION: The analysis suggests the OGEP intervention may offer reductions in resource costs and improvements in patient outcomes. OGEP may therefore provide an innovative solution in future care delivery.