Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us

Future Healthcare Journal

  • FHJ Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About FHJ
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
RCP Journals
Home
  • Log in
  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us
Advanced

Future Healthcare Journal

futurehosp Logo
  • FHJ Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About FHJ
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

Measuring the success of a short-stay unit

Beshlie Richards, Melanie Nana, Hannah Cranch, Ruth Alcolado and Helen Lane
Download PDF
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7861/futurehosp.4-2-s8
Future Hosp J June 2017
Beshlie Richards
Royal Glamorgan Hospital, Llantrisant, Cardiff, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Melanie Nana
Royal Glamorgan Hospital, Llantrisant, Cardiff, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hannah Cranch
Royal Glamorgan Hospital, Llantrisant, Cardiff, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ruth Alcolado
Royal Glamorgan Hospital, Llantrisant, Cardiff, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Helen Lane
Royal Glamorgan Hospital, Llantrisant, Cardiff, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
Loading

Aims

Having set up a short-stay unit (SSU) with an expected length of stay <72 hours, we aim to identify the number of patients who do not meet their anticipated date of discharge (ADD) and the reasons why.

Methods

Initial details and journey summaries were collected for all medical patients admitted from 4–11 April 2016 (n=117). Patients managed in an ambulatory care setting were excluded from the study. Prospective data were collected, capturing relevant baseline information, medical and social care administered throughout the patient’s stay. Patients defined by the admitting consultant as appropriate for admission to the SSU (ADD <72 hours) were categorised as short-stay patients (n=58). At inception of the SSU, there had been investment in pharmacy, therapy and coordinator staff roles.

Data for those who did not meet their ADD were analysed by a focus group, including junior, middle- and consultant-grade doctors to identify the reasons behind delayed discharges. Three patients died unexpectedly during their admission; these cases were subjected to detailed mortality review and excluded from the final analysis.

Results

44% (24/55) of patients did not meet their ADD of <72 hours. In combination, short-stay patients who exceeded their 72-hour stay spent a subsequent 215 days in hospital. 38% (81/215) of these additional days were a consequence of unpredicted deterioration or ongoing medical care. Of the remaining 134 days, 17 were spent awaiting diagnostic investigations or specialist review. 52% (112/215) of additional days’ stay were accumulated while patients were medically fit for discharge (MFFD).

The area accounting for the greatest proportion (92%) of excess days’ stay while patients were MFFD was discharge planning. Discharge planning included initiation or reinstatement of care packages, transfer to external rehabilitation sites and rehabilitation with physiotherapy and occupational therapy teams. There were no delays as a consequence of provision of take-home medication.

Conclusions

The greatest barrier to timely discharge in patients admitted to a recently developed SSU was prolonged discharge planning, where delays arose from finite availability of services, poor communication within the multidisciplinary team and delayed referrals. We have since introduced a ‘hospital front door’ social worker who is available 12 hours per day, 7 days a week, who will aim to facilitate this process. The coordinator role needs redefinition to further support the multidisciplinary team. Pharmacy investment is working well.

Conflict of interest statement

None to declare.

  • © Royal College of Physicians 2017. All rights reserved.
Back to top
Previous articleNext article

Article Tools

Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Measuring the success of a short-stay unit
Beshlie Richards, Melanie Nana, Hannah Cranch, Ruth Alcolado, Helen Lane
Future Hosp J Jun 2017, 4 (Suppl 2) s8; DOI: 10.7861/futurehosp.4-2-s8

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Measuring the success of a short-stay unit
Beshlie Richards, Melanie Nana, Hannah Cranch, Ruth Alcolado, Helen Lane
Future Hosp J Jun 2017, 4 (Suppl 2) s8; DOI: 10.7861/futurehosp.4-2-s8
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Aims
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Conclusions
    • Conflict of interest statement
  • Info & Metrics

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • A novel 2-week wait lung cancer pathway starting with a telephone consultation, with patient satisfaction survey results
  • Teledermatology for all? A service evaluation of mandatory teledermatology in Cardiff and Vale UHB 2016–17
  • Women speakers in healthcare: taking steps towards balanced gender representation
Show more Health Services and Policy

Similar Articles

Navigate this Journal

  • Journal Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive

Related Links

  • ClinMed - Home
  • FHJ - Home

Other Services

  • Advertising
futurehosp Footer Logo
  • Home
  • Journals
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
HighWire Press, Inc.

Follow Us:

  • Follow HighWire Origins on Twitter
  • Visit HighWire Origins on Facebook

Copyright © 2021 by the Royal College of Physicians