<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://www.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=undefined&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>
Background: Effective communication and collaboration between departments are crucial for optimal patient care. This clinical audit evaluated cross-departmental coordination in a healthcare institution, focusing on radiology, laboratory services, and medical specialties. Methods: The audit employed a mixed-methods approach, utilizing data collection through medical record review, semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals, and analysis of communication metrics and existing protocols. Results: The audit revealed strengths in the reliance on diverse communication channels but identified weaknesses in outdated software, lack of real-time notifications, and unclear escalation procedures. Information sharing was hindered by inconsistent access rights, report formatting, and missing data elements. Clinical protocols, while clear for routine cases, lacked guidance for unforeseen situations and standardized interdepartmental communication, leading to inconsistencies in adherence and potential errors. Conclusion: This audit highlights the need for modernization and streamlining of communication channels, standardization of information sharing, and development of robust clinical protocols with guidance for unforeseen events and interdepartmental communication pathways. Implementing these improvements can foster a more efficient, collaborative, and patient-centered care environment. Keywords: Cross-departmental coordination, communication, information sharing, clinical protocols, patient care
citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |