You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Letter
Surgical ward round proforma can improve documentation and efficiency of ward rounds
  1. Dominic Dewson,
  2. Victoria Eves,
  3. Robert Gaskell,
  4. Alex Hardman,
  5. Ibrahim Akinpelu,
  6. Emma Woodcock,
  7. Joshua Franklyn,
  8. Sebastian Smolarek
  1. Colorectal Department, University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Plymouth, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Dominic Dewson, Plymouth, UK; dominic.dewson{at}nhs.net

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/postgradmedj-2020-139412

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Daily ward rounds (WR) represent a fundamental part of the delivery of surgical care. It is an opportunity for the senior members of the team to review all aspects of the patient’s treatment pathway and decide on the most appropriate management plan going forward.

    The quality and effectiveness of a WR relies on good documentation. Not only from a medico-legal perspective but also as communication between multidisciplinary teams (MDT). Both in and out of hours, the information written on the WR directly influences decisions made and therefore patient safety. Furthermore, the introduction of the European Working Time Directive has created complex shift-based work patterns, in which the members of the WR are regularly rotating.1 Good documentation is the one constant that maintains effective continuity of care and is the base of good patient care.

    The General Medical Council (GMC) of the UK has clear guidance on what is expected to be documented in the doctor–patient interactions.2 Despite this, research continues to find a failure to reach these standards.3–7 In fact in a UK study of 432 surgeon–patient consultations, key information …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors All authors have contributed throughout this project, from data collection, analysis of results and writing of the report.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.