Administering Antimicrobial Agents for Prophylaxis Assignment

Administering Antimicrobial Agents for Prophylaxis Assignment

Provide process and outcome (for example, surgical site infection rate) measure results to key stakeholders.

6.

Administer antimicrobial agents for prophylaxis for a particular procedure or disease according to methods cited in scientific literature or endorsed by professional organizations. * Footnote *

A limited number of National Patient Safety Goals contain requirements for practices that reflect current science and medical knowledge. In these cases, the element of performance refers to a practice that is cited in scientific literature or endorsed by professional organizations. This means that the practice used by the organization must be validated by an authoritative source.

The authoritative source may be a study published in a peer-reviewed journal that clearly demonstrates the efficacy of that practice or endorsement of the practice by a professional organization(s) and/or a government agency(ies). It is not acceptable to follow a practice that is not supported by evidence or widespread consensus. During the on-site survey, surveyors will explore the source of the practices the organization follows.

7.

When hair removal is necessary, use a method that is cited in scientific literature or endorsed by professional organizations. * Footnote *: A limited number of National Patient Safety Goals contain requirements for practices that reflect current science and medical knowledge. In these cases, the element of performance refers to a practice that is cited in scientific literature or endorsed by professional organizations.

This means that the practice used by the organization must be validated by an authoritative source. The authoritative source may be a study published in a peer-reviewed journal that clearly demonstrates the efficacy of that practice or endorsement of the practice by a professional organization(s) and/or a government agency(ies). It is not acceptable to follow a practice that is not supported by evidence or widespread consensus. During the on-site survey, surveyors will explore the source of the practices the organization follows.

8.

© 2020 The Joint Commission

Page 7 of 11

Ambulatory Health Care National Patient Safety Goals Effective January 1, 2020

Introduction to the Universal Protocol for Preventing Wrong Site, Wrong

Procedure, and Wrong Person Surgery™ The Universal Protocol applies to all surgical and nonsurgical invasive procedures. Evidence indicates that procedures that place the patient at the most risk include those that involve general anesthesia or deep sedation, although other procedures may also affect patient safety. Organizations can enhance safety by correctly identifying the patient, the appropriate procedure, and the correct site of the procedure.

The Universal Protocol is based on the following principles: – Wrong-person, wrong-site, and wrong-procedure surgery can and must be prevented. – A robust approach using multiple, complementary strategies is necessary to achieve the goal of always conducting the correct procedure on the correct person, at the correct site. – Active involvement and use of effective methods to improve communication among all members of the procedure team are important for success. – To the extent possible, the patient and, as needed, the family are involved in the process. – Consistent implementation of a standardized protocol is most effective in achieving safety.

The Universal Protocol is implemented most successfully in organizations with a culture that promotes teamwork and where all individuals feel empowered to protect patient safety. An organization should consider its culture when designing processes to meet the Universal Protocol. In some organizations, it may be necessary to be more prescriptive on certain elements of the Universal Protocol or to create processes that are not specifically addressed within these requirements.

Organizations should identify the timing and location of the preprocedure verification and site marking based on what works best for their own unique circumstances. The frequency and scope of the preprocedure verification will depend on the type and complexity of the procedure. The three components of the Universal Protocol are not necessarily presented in chronological order (although the preprocedure verification and site marking precede the final verification in the time-out). Preprocedure verification, site marking, and the time-out procedures should be as consistent as possible throughout the organization.

Note: Site marking is not required when the individual doing the procedure is continuously with the patient from the time of the decision to do the procedure through to the performance of the procedure.

Conduct a preprocedural verification process.

UP.01.01.01

Organizations should always make sure that any procedure is what the patient needs and is performed on the right person. The frequency and scope of the verification process will depend on the type and complexity of the procedure.

The preprocedure verification is an ongoing process of information gathering and confirmation. The purpose of the preprocedure verification process is to make sure that all relevant documents and related information or equipment are as follows: – Available prior to the start of the procedure – Correctly identified, labeled, and matched to the patient’s identifiers – Reviewed and are consistent with the patient’s expectations and with the team’s understanding of the intended patient, procedure, and site

Preprocedure verification may occur at more than one time and place before the procedure. It is up to the organization to decide when this information is collected and by which team member, but it is best to do it when the patient can be involved. Possibilities include the following: – When the procedure is scheduled – At the time of preadmission testing and assessment – At the time of admission or entry into the facility for a procedure – Before the patient leaves the preprocedure area or enters the procedure room

Missing information or discrepancies are addressed before starting the procedure.

–Rationale for UP.01.01.01–

© 2020 The Joint Commission

Page 8 of 11

Ambulatory Health Care National Patient Safety Goals Effective January 1, 2020

Elements of Performance for UP.01.01.01

Implement a preprocedure process to verify the correct procedure, for the correct patient, at the correct site. Note: The patient is involved in the verification process when possible.

1.

Identify the items that must be available for the procedure and use a standardized list to verify their availability. At a minimum, these items include the following: – Relevant documentation (for example, history and physical, signed procedure consent form, nursing assessment, and preanesthesia assessment) – Labeled diagnostic and radiology test results (for example, radiology images and scans, or pathology and biopsy reports) that are properly displayed – Any required blood products, implants, devices, and/or special equipment for the procedure Note: The expectation of this element of performance is that the standardized list is available and is used consistently during the preprocedure verification. It is not necessary to document that the standardized list was used for each patient.

2.

Match the items that are to be available in the procedure area to the patient.3.

Mark the procedure site.

UP.01.02.01

Elements of Performance for UP.01.02.01

Introduction to UP.01.02.01 Wrong-site surgery should never happen. Yet it is an ongoing problem in health care that compromises patient safety. Marking the procedure site is one way to protect patients; patient safety is enhanced when a consistent marking process is used throughout the organization. Site marking is done to prevent errors when there is more than one possible location for a procedure. Examples include different limbs, fingers and toes, lesions, level of the spine, and organs. In cases where bilateral structures are removed (such as tonsils or ovaries) the site does not need to be marked.

Responsibility for marking the procedure site is a hotly debated topic. One position is that since the licensed independent practitioner is accountable for the procedure, he or she should mark the site. Another position is that other individuals should be able to mark the site in the interests of work flow and efficiency.

There is no evidence that patient safety is affected by the job function of the individual who marks the site. The incidence of wrong-site surgery is low enough that it is unlikely that valid data on this subject will ever be available. Furthermore, there is no clear consensus in the field on who should mark the site. Rather than remaining silent on the subject of site marking, The Joint Commission sought a solution that supports the purpose of the site mark. The mark is a communication tool about the patient for members of the team. Therefore, the individual who knows the most about the patient should mark the site. In most cases, that will be the person performing the procedure.

Recognizing the complexities of the work processes supporting invasive procedures, The Joint Commission believes that delegation of site marking to another individual is acceptable in limited situations as long as the individual is familiar with the patient and involved in the procedure. These individuals would include the following: – Individuals who are permitted through a postgraduate education program to participate in the procedure. – A licensed individual who performs duties requiring collaborative or supervisory agreements with a licensed independent practitioner. These individuals include advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) and physician assistants (PAs).

The licensed independent practitioner remains fully accountable for all aspects of the procedure even when site marking is delegated.

Identify those procedures that require marking of the incision or insertion site. At a minimum, sites are marked when there is more than one possible location for the procedure and when performing the procedure in a different location would negatively affect quality or safety. Note: For spinal procedures, in addition to preoperative skin marking of the general spinal region, special intraoperative imaging techniques may be used for locating and marking the exact vertebral level.

1.

© 2020 The Joint Commission

Page 9 of 11

Ambulatory Health Care National Patient Safety Goals Effective January 1, 2020

Mark the procedure site before the procedure is performed and, if possible, with the patient involved.

2.

The procedure site is marked by a licensed independent practitioner who is ultimately accountable for the procedure and will be present when the procedure is performed. In limited circumstances, the licensed independent practitioner may delegate site marking to an individual who is permitted by the organization to participate in the procedure and has the following qualifications: –

An individual in a medical postgraduate education program who is being supervised by the licensed independent practitioner performing the procedure; who is familiar with the patient; and who will be present when the procedure is performed – A licensed individual who performs duties requiring a collaborative agreement or supervisory agreement with the licensed independent practitioner performing the procedure (that is, an advanced practice registered nurse [APRN] or physician assistant [PA]); who is familiar with the patient; and who will be present when the procedure is performed. Note: The organization’s leaders define the limited circumstances (if any) in which site marking may be delegated to an individual meeting these qualifications.

3.

The method of marking the site and the type of mark is unambiguous and is used consistently throughout the organization. Note: The mark is made at or near the procedure site and is sufficiently permanent to be visible after skin preparation and draping. Adhesive markers are not the sole means of marking the site.

4.

A written, alternative process is in place for patients who refuse site marking or when it is technically or anatomically impossible or impractical to mark the site (for example, mucosal surfaces or perineum). Note: Examples of other situations that involve alternative processes include: – Minimal access procedures treating a lateralized internal organ, whether percutaneous or through a natural orifice – Teeth – Premature infants, for whom the mark may cause a permanent tattoo

 

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!