Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this paper was to explore key factors that influenced the spread of "See and Treat" in a range of accident and emergency (A&E) departments.
Methods: The study adopted a qualitative approach, and semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 21 key individuals working across 10 A&E departments operating See and Treat. Participants included clinicians, managers, and chief executives.
Results: Many factors influenced the spread of See and Treat. The initiative was well supported and monitored by external agencies, patients benefited and no staff groups lost out, waiting times were reduced, and Department of Health targets were achieved. However, this study indicates there were also a range of factors that limited the spread of See and Treat, including lack of additional resources and suitably experienced staff, impact upon quality of care, and no prior evaluation of its benefits. An interesting additional factor that may be both facilitating and limiting is the complexity of the A&E culture, in particular staff perspectives about working with minor injuries.
Conclusions: See and Treat was promoted as a solution to waiting times problems in A&E, without evidence from any national evaluation. However, many staff members referred to its usefulness as a tool to reduce waiting times and enhance the patient journey, although resource, quality, and staffing issues may mean such an initiative may be difficult to sustain in its present form.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (72.0 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Byrne G., Richardson M., Brunsdon J., Patel A. An evaluation of the care of patients with minor injuries in emergency settings. Accid Emerg Nurs. 2000 Apr;8(2):101–109. doi: 10.1054/aaen.2000.0102. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Castille K., Cooke M. One size does not fit all. View 2. Emerg Med J. 2003 Mar;20(2):120–122. doi: 10.1136/emj.20.2.120. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Cooke M. W., Wilson S., Pearson S. The effect of a separate stream for minor injuries on accident and emergency department waiting times. Emerg Med J. 2002 Jan;19(1):28–30. doi: 10.1136/emj.19.1.28. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Leaman A. M. See and Treat: a management driven method of achieving targets or a tool for better patient care? One size does not fit all. Emerg Med J. 2003 Mar;20(2):118–118. doi: 10.1136/emj.20.2.118. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Partovi S. N., Nelson B. K., Bryan E. D., Walsh M. J. Faculty triage shortens emergency department length of stay. Acad Emerg Med. 2001 Oct;8(10):990–995. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2001.tb01099.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Wardrope J., Driscoll P. Turbulent times. Emerg Med J. 2003 Mar;20(2):116–116. doi: 10.1136/emj.20.2.116. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Windle J., Mackway-Jones K. Don't throw triage out with the bathwater. Emerg Med J. 2003 Mar;20(2):119–120. doi: 10.1136/emj.20.2.119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]