Aye, the UK has the '4 hour standard' (used to be the 4 hour target) which means, in real terms, that patients must be seen and in theory treated started (and finished if they're not being admitted) within 4 hours.
It largely works. Unless you're an 'expected' patient, in which case you're being admitted and you've been seen by your family doctor anyhow.
It is, actually, a good thing in many ways. Just the strictness of the rule (something like 98% of patients have to be through in that time) means that quite often patient care gets compromised to meet the target. I've been ordered to take patients to wards when I've not felt it was safe. I've seen doctors taken away mid consultation to get the patients moved.
I've heard of much worse.
I've heard of nurses having their jobs threatened for not moving patients 'before they breach', I've seen people taking people off as being moved when they're not ready.
But - the concept at least is good. It's transformed the way emergency care works here. And it seems, most people think in a largely good way.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
sforzinda
no subject
Date: 2009-01-24 08:45 pm (UTC)It largely works. Unless you're an 'expected' patient, in which case you're being admitted and you've been seen by your family doctor anyhow.
It is, actually, a good thing in many ways. Just the strictness of the rule (something like 98% of patients have to be through in that time) means that quite often patient care gets compromised to meet the target. I've been ordered to take patients to wards when I've not felt it was safe. I've seen doctors taken away mid consultation to get the patients moved.
I've heard of much worse.
I've heard of nurses having their jobs threatened for not moving patients 'before they breach', I've seen people taking people off as being moved when they're not ready.
But - the concept at least is good. It's transformed the way emergency care works here. And it seems, most people think in a largely good way.