In the recent past, hospitals and healthcare organization balked at the cost of safe patient handling and mobility (SPHM) equipment, for instance, patient lifts. Over the last few years, however, awareness of work-related injury (and its costs) among healthcare staff has grown. In addition, recent studies indicate that SPHM investments pay for themselves quickly. That said, there are quite a few SPHM tools and technologies with a low price point; some are even free!
Inadequate staffing and substandard patient handling equipment can get in the way of a nurse’s ability to care for patients. And then there is the human factor. Walk into any office break room, and you will find a wide variety of temperaments and personalities. In fact, sitcoms and movies that parody workplace culture are commonplace. In healthcare, however, where a patient’s welfare is in question, disruptive behavior is no laughing matter. HR problems can escalate quickly and can have dramatic negative impacts.
In 2018, the number of U.S. workers involved in strikes and lockouts was at its highest rate since 1986. This is despite the fact that percentage of U.S. workers who belong to a union continues to fall; the current rate is 10.5%.
If you have followed the previous four posts in our series on indirect costs of endoscopy staff injury, you know that musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) sustained on the job are costly. Case in point: the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) estimates that one of every three dollars spent on workers’ compensation claims originates with ergonomic problems, and costs related to MSDs amount to more than $54 billion per year. This article, which is the last in the series, looks at how MSDs affect an organization’s ability to comply with worker safety regulations and the financial consequences of violations.
Welcome to the fourth installation of ColoWrap’s deep dive into the repercussions of endoscopy staff injury. So far, the posts in this series have examined the effects of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) on healthcare staff and the facilities that employ them. This installment explores the impacts of these injuries on patients.
In 2018, the healthcare job market continued it historical growth, with 42.3% of hospitals predicting an increase in their labor force for 2019. Yet the hospital turnover rate stands at 19.1%. As for nurses, 49% of them have considered leaving the profession in the last two years, according to a 2018 study. So who will fill those vacant positions?
Last week’s blog post covered presenteeism and how it affected endoscopy staff. This week we will explore absenteeism and its effects on healthcare organizations and employees.
This blog series explores five indirect costs stemming from endoscopy staff injury and their real-life implications on GI units. Installment #1 covers presenteeism, which occurs when an employee is physically at work but because of pain, injury, illness, or other medical conditions, is not performing adequately.
Waiting is hating
Americans hate to wait, whether it’s for food, Internet connectivity, or a green light. So it should come as no surprise that the more time patients spend waiting to see a physician, the more dissatisfied they are. What might be surprising is that longer wait times have a negative impact on other, potentially more consequential aspects of the patient experience, specifically patients’ confidence in their physician and how they perceive their quality of care.
Topics: colonoscopy, endoscopy, screening, healthcare costs, GI nursing, endoscopy nursing, looping in colonoscopy, endoscopist, difficult colonoscopy, gastroenterologist, CRC, colorectal cancer, tortuous colon, hospital costs, patient experience, cecal intubation time, ColoWrap
Why would you have a sedation-free colonoscopy, when the norm is sleeping through the procedure and having no recollection of it?
Topics: nurse, endocopy, patient, screening, adenoma, polyp, Deep sedation, Propofol, Propofol for colonoscopy, patient safety, GI nursing, endoscopy nursing, endoscopist, gastroenterologist, CRC, colorectal cancer, hospital costs, patient experience