Sunday, October 11, 2015

Reflective Journal Week 7: Quality Improvement Strategies II

1) I had expected to learn more quality improvement strategies during this unit.

2) I actually learned a great deal how not to confuse Common Causes with Special Causes.  According to our lecture video provided from the Mayo Clinic (2012) which presents Edward Deming’s theories of profound knowledge, reacting to common causes is like scraping burnt toast. One might ask what a common cause is? A Common Cause is an occurrence that is constantly active within a system (Mayo Clinic, 2012). It is predictable. A Special Cause, on the other hand, is the new, unanticipated, emergent or previously neglected occurrence within a system (Mayo Clinic, 2012). Special Causes are unpredictable. Deming stated not to react to common causes, because they are already going to be present in a system, and it will only make things worse. For example, a Common Cause is the burnt toast produced by a poorly designed toaster. Continually scraping the burnt toast to make it look better only makes things worse and doesn’t fix the problem. In contrast, a Special Cause is the toaster.  If the heat is turned down on the toaster, burnt toast will no longer be produced.
            Quality Improvement teams need to remember not to react to Common Causes, because they will always be present in a system—there is no point in scraping burnt toast. The focus should be fixing the Special Causes in a system. Ways to recognize the Special Causes is through collection of data and creation of a control chart with upper and lower controls. A sequence of seven or more points continuously moving upward or downward is considered a “trend.” A clump of eight points above or below the upper/lower control limits is called a “run.” These runs are the Special Causes that must be paid attention to in a system. They are unpredictable and need fixing to produce better outcomes.

3) I enjoyed the team discussion on our burn victim patient that had second and third degree burns on 75% of his body. Our burn victim had a poor nutritional status with a decreased appetite.  One member of my team brought up research about the caloric needs for victims with a burn covering 25% of total body surface area (TBSA). Caloric needs can exceed 5,000 calories per day. Our group discussion focused on possible reasons why this patient had a decreased appetite and ways to increase his nutritional status.
            We concluded that pain was likely a large contributing factor to this patient’s decreased appetite. Dehydration secondary to his burns likely increased his feelings of nausea and compounded his poor appetite too. We also assumed the patient may be depressed from trying to cope with this disfigured body, and those feelings of depression were possibly reasons why he may not feel like eating as well.
            We decided the healthcare team needed to focus their efforts on increasing his appetite via pain control, ensuring adequate hydration via intravenous fluids and oral intake, beginning tube feedings with a high-calorie/high-protein formula, make snacks readily available for the patient, and administer anti-nausea medications and appetite stimulant medications such as marinol to help meet this patient’s nutritional needs and stimulate his appetite. The nurse would include the patient’s family in encouraging him to eat high calorie/high-protein snacks throught the day as well. We concluded that these efforts implemented by the healthcare team would increase his nutritional status allowing for better wound healing to take place and for his immune system to be improved.

4) I plan to utilize the information I have learned in my nursing practice by trying to recognize common causes in our process improvement systems, and not react to them. They are predictable and will always be present in a system. I will, however, recognize the special causes and try to fix them, so process improvement plans can carry on, and lead to better patient outcomes.   

5) I enjoyed the material covered. I want to become more familiar with statistical analysis, variation, data collection and research in my nursing practice. This way I can use statistical tools such as flow charts, diagrams, or control charts (Sollecito & Johnson, 2013, p. 77-116) to help analyze and improve processes.

References

Mayo Clinic (April 2012). Common cause and burnt toast. Retrieved online from     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctn1JFsNiCE&list=PLUuOgSK-0gzHmArwz4iwLy0zz_EeP0JSN


Sollecito, W. A., & Johnson, J. K. (2013). Mclaughlin and Kaluzny's continuous quality improvement in health care. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

No comments:

Post a Comment