1 / 19

Relevance of the expression “ obs stabl e ” : a retrospective study

Relevance of the expression “ obs stabl e ” : a retrospective study. Gregory Scott Academic clinical fellow Roshan Vijayan Core surgical trainee Pandora Male Medical student. Obs stable. Seriousness. Serious and important  BMJ. Quite silly and not important  Christmas BMJ.

maleah
Download Presentation

Relevance of the expression “ obs stabl e ” : a retrospective study

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Relevance of the expression “obs stable”: a retrospective study Gregory Scott Academic clinical fellowRoshan Vijayan Core surgical traineePandora Male Medical student

  2. Obs stable

  3. Seriousness Serious and important  BMJ Quite silly and not important  Christmas BMJ Importance

  4. Should we seriously worry about what we write?

  5. What’s wrong with “obs stable”? • “Stable” might be interpreted as “normal” But A patient with persistent tachycardia has “stable” observations 2. “Obs stable” implies a lack of rigour

  6. What do we even mean by “stable”? Current obs within “normal” range? Variation in obs within “normal” limits (L) for a given time period (t)? L t

  7. Study • Objective: To ascertain whether use of the term “obs stable” is so liberal as to render it meaningless. • Design: Retrospective study • Setting: Three London hospitals • Methods • Searched notes for current admission of 46 randomly selected inpatients for “obs stable” entries • Reviewed the nursing observations recorded during the 24 hours preceding each entry • Calculated for these 24 hour periods: • Frequency of anyabnormalities • Frequency of persistent abnormalities (occurring in every observation) • Range (max.-min.) of observation values if at least two observations had been recorded

  8. Results: “obs stable” occurrences • 1+ “obs stable” entry in 36 (78%) notes • 178 “obs stable” entries total (3.9 per patient) • 1st “obs stable” entry on day 2 (median) • 3.9 nursing observations charted in the 24 hours before each entry (SD 1.4)

  9. Results: abnormalities in the 24 hours preceding “obs stable” • 1+ abnormality in 113 (71%) of 159 cases • Tachypnoea (55%), hypotension (21%), tachycardia (13%), desaturation (16%) • 1+ one persistent abnormality in 31 (19%) cases • Abnormality occurred in the observations immediately preceding an entry in 42% • Definitions • Hypotension = SBP <100mmHg, Tachycardia = HR >100/min • Pyrexia = temperature >38C, Tachypnoea = RR≥20/min • Oxygen desaturation = saturations <95%

  10. Results: all “stable” observations

  11. Results: 24 hourly range of “stable” observations

  12. Discussion: findings • Doctors regularly used the expression “obs stable” • “Obs stable” was often associated with a 24 hour period which included abnormal observations • In two fifths of cases, an abnormality occurred in the observations immediately preceding an “obs stable” entry • The range of observations over a 24 hour period that were designated “stable” occasionally exceeded normal values of diurnal variation

  13. Discussion: limitations • Small sample • No comparison with non-“stable” entries • Arbitrary definition of abnormalities • Arbitrary choice of 24 hour period • Difficult to define “normal” diurnal variation

  14. Discussion: why do we write“obs stable”? • Lack of time given to documentation • Intended to be less committal • Observation chart design • The patient seems well

  15. Conclusions • The meaning of “obs stable” is ambiguous and does not always indicate normality. • What could we write instead? • Write the observations in full • Qualify “obs stable” by adding “for the last X hours” or • “Last abnormal observation was X [observation] at Y [time]” • Perhaps obs stable has become ubiquitous precisely because it of its ambiguity.

  16. Thank you

More Related