The use of abbreviations is a common practice in almost all disciplines globally. Abbreviations are simply shorter versions of the words which are commonly used in the field. The abbreviations are commonly agreed upon among the players in the disciplines. This means that officers can effectively communicate using abbreviations while at the same time alienating those outside the field. In some fields, the use of these abbreviations is incorporated during the training period especially at institutions of higher learning. The abbreviations amount to codes common among people within a certain field but unique to the field.
Consequently, what is applicable to lawyers is completely different from what engineers use and also different from what is applicable to the medical field. This paper explores the use of abbreviations in the healthcare field and how this interferes with the communication process among different players in the sector, the possible resultant errors, and possible remedies. It also looks at the effectiveness of eliminating abbreviations in error reduction, suggests policies applicable to ensure effective use of abbreviations, and looks at the measures already taken to reduce errors.
Eliminating abbreviations
The healthcare field is a very sensitive field mainly because it deals directly with the restoration of health to people. Unfortunately, the field is crowded with different professionals who must work together to ensure success in health restoration. They range from emergency caregivers, nurses, doctors, surgeons, X-ray technicians, laboratory technicians, and pharmacists. Communication between these professionals is not only voluminous but also prone to errors that cause or significantly increase the probability of death for the patient hence negating all the benefits of having the system. Estimates show that over 80% of fatal errors in the medical field result from poor communication among caregivers (Cohen, p740).
The use of abbreviations has been cited as the most important cause of miscommunication. Despite the efforts into in ensuring that all caregivers are conversant with the abbreviations, errors still do occur. Some players in the field have recommended that the abbreviations be eliminated in order to reduce the occurrence of such errors. In the year 2004, the Joint Commission developed a “do not use list” of abbreviations. The list contained numerous abbreviations which were identified as causing miscommunication among caregivers. These were identified after a threthree-yearvey of communication in medical institutions.
Clearly, the most important gain from such action is the clarity of reports. When abbreviations are eliminated and replaced by the full version, there’s much less likelihood of misinterpretation. Therefore in a case where a laboratory technician has avoided the use of abbreviations, there are fewer chances of the doctor misinterpreting the lab results hence a minimal chance of misdiagnosis. According to the research conducted by the joint commission, the errors resulting from abbreviations were mainly a result of differing handwriting which made it possible for caregivers to confuse letters and hence the message. Eliminating usethe of abbreviations conclusively deals with this problem (Institute for Safe Medication Practices, par5).
Written policies on the abbreviation
As earlier mentioned, the field of healthcare is overly sensitive owing to the fact that it deals directly with the health of human beings. This being the case, the use of abbreviations in recording medical data must be carefully regulated. Proper policies must be put in place to ensure accuracy in the use of abbreviations. Such policies should address circumstances when abbreviations can be used. This entails establishing any requirements for the use of abbreviations and limiting the usage of the abbreviations to meet the specified requirements.
The policies should also specifically point out which abbreviations are or are not acceptable for usecaregiversvers. This should be done with the aim of completely eliminating the usage of abbreviations that are prone to errors. In addition, there should be clear penalties for any caregiver who breaches the specifications laid out in the policies.
Acceptability of abbreviations
Acceptability of abbreviations especially when handwritten should be limited to cases where it may not be possible to employ the usage of computers. In the modern age, caregivers mainly use integrated information systems which enable them to send information electronically and in a standard format. However, there are specific cases where the caregiver is not in a position to utilize such technologies instantly. Under such conditions, it may be wise to write down the records using abbreviations. However, even in such scenarios, the caregiver should try and convert the records into electronic form before transmission to the next caregiver.
Cases where handwritten abbreviations may be acceptable include surgeries and field operations where connectivity may be a problem. In a case where the surgeon would like to offer some written instructions to other officers in an operation room, it may take shorter for him/her to use abbreviations in writing. The recipient though has the opportunity to clarify anything which may not be clear before carrying out the instructions.
Steps were taken to reduce errors and their effectiveness
Numerous steps have been taken towards error reduction in the field of healthcare. The Joint Commission has been at the forefront in establishing ways of preventing communication breakdown within medical institutions as well as between them. This is after finding out that almost 40% of transfers are defective in the sense that not all critical information is availed concerning the transferred patient. Two main approaches have been developed towards addressing this problem.
The first is the standardization of crucial information. This includes pending medical tests, drug allergies, and other information considered vital when patients are exchanged among caregivers. Such standardized information not only eliminates the problems associated with the use of abbreviations, but also creates a common language of presentation. The second and most effective are giving opportunities for caregivers to ask questions. More informal forums are now encouraged among caregivers to discuss a patient’s condition among caregivers from different disciplines. This helps clear the air on any ambiguities. Again, accountability among staff members has been enhanced to reduce cases of negligence. In line with these, great investment has been done in areas of training and education of the caregivers (Smetzer, p232).
The gains made by these and other measures taken to reduce errors in the field are immense. The steps taken are effective though there is always more room to improve. It is clear that the change from the implementation of these policies has brought great changes. Patient safety has greatly increased as errors in communication reduce.
References
Cohen M, Preventing medication errors in cancer chemotherapy. Am J Health-System Pharm. 1996; 53 (7):737-46.
Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP). Discussion paper on adverse event and error reporting in healthcare. Huntingdon Valley, PA: ISMP; 2000. Web.
Smetzer J. Findings from the ISMP Medication Safety Self Assessment for Hospitals. Joint Com Journ on Qual and Safety. 2003; 29(11).