International nursing
Attempting to Reduce the Maximum Emergency Waiting Time to 4 Hours in England: Was the Initiative Successful?,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jen.2012.04.002Get rights and content

Section snippets

Background/Context

In 2001 the Department of Health introduced an initiative to limit the standard waiting time in the emergency department to decrease time to treatment and enhance patient experience. The introduction of a 4-hour operational standard waiting time was implemented, but was it successful and what were the implications for staff and patients?

The NHS Plan proposed that “by 2004 no-one should be waiting more than four hours in accident and emergency from arrival to admission, transfer or discharge.”2

New Ways of Working

“See and treat” is a system where senior clinicians assess and manage patients as they arrive. This is one of the key innovations that have resulted in a better experience for patients attending the emergency department with minor illness and injury while simultaneously helping staff to manage their workloads.10 Campaigns promoting appropriate use of health services (Figure1, Figure2) and promoting minor-injury units, primary care physicians, and pharmacies as alternatives to the emergency

The Future: Clinical Quality Indicators

After the change in government in May 2010, there have been new proposals for ED targets. The new government has proposed 8 clinical quality indicators, focusing on effective care, patients’ experience, and patient safety (Table) to replace the 4-hour waiting time operational standard.12 Although the 4-hour target highlighted the need for efficiency in the emergency department, it was not an answer in itself, and these new indicators have evolved from this original concept. Time is still

Conclusion

The 4-hour wait operational standard to reduce waiting times and improve throughput through the emergency department was introduced in the United Kingdom in 2001 but has recently been replaced with 8 clinical quality indicators. Although the drive to reduce the waiting times in the emergency department by meeting the 4-hour target certainly had some benefits, the compromises sometimes required to achieve this have raised concerns. The new initiative takes into account waiting time but also

Alison Day, International Member of ENA, is Senior Lecturer in Emergency Nursing, Faculty of Health & Life Sciences, Coventry University, Coventry, England.

First page preview

First page preview
Click to open first page preview

References (12)

  • L Horwitz et al.

    US emergency department performance on wait time and length of visit

    J Emerg Nurs

    (2010)
  • Department of Health

    The NHS Plan: A Plan for Investment, a Plan for Reform

    (2000)
  • Department of Health

    Clinical Exceptions to the Four Hour Emergency Care Target

    (2003)
  • JV Freeman et al.

    The impact of the 4 h target on patient care and outcomes in the emergency department: an analysis of hospital incidence data

    Emerg Med J

    (2010)
  • H Scott

    BMA claims that patients in A&E are being put at risk

    Br J Nurs

    (2005)
  • A Mortimore et al.

    The “4-hour target”: emergency nurses’ views

    Emerg Med J

    (2007)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Alison Day, International Member of ENA, is Senior Lecturer in Emergency Nursing, Faculty of Health & Life Sciences, Coventry University, Coventry, England.

Carol Oldroyd, International Member of ENA, is Senior Lecturer in Cardiac Nursing, Faculty of Health & Life Sciences, Coventry University, Coventry, England.

Earn Up to 9 CE Hours. See page 409.

Section Editors: Pat Clutter, RN, MEd, CEN, FAEN, and Carole Rush, RN, MEd, CEN, FAEN

Submissions to this column are encouraged may be sent to Pat Clutter, RN, MEd, CEN, FAEN[email protected]orCarole Rush, RN, MEd, CEN, FAEN[email protected]

View full text