Making stock, taking stock: Emergency inventory madness!
Hospital Safety Insider, June 20, 2019
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Hospital Safety Insider!
In trolling The Joint Commission’s FAQ page for interesting tidbits to share, I came across the entry regarding the thought process around the establishment of an emergency inventory. Some interesting takes on certain aspects of the emergency inventory concept—it doesn’t “have” to be centralized, in recognition of “just in time” purchasing and the importance of being able to use stock with a shelf-life (it would not be good to have your EM supplies expire because they were earmarked solely for emergency response).
The FAQ goes on to recommend tracking assets and inventory for a year to ascertain what your organization’s capabilities and needs might be. But I’m trying to figure out how that “recommendation” (recognizing that the FAQs can be invoked at the level of standards-based requirement) dovetails with the “requirement” for an annual “review” (I remain stymied by the use of “review” as opposed to evaluation; it may just be me, but a review doesn’t have the same action level as an evaluation but perhaps they are to be considered synonymous) of the inventory of resources and assets needed during an emergency. My thought would be that you would be looking at how resources and assets are managed on an ongoing basis and that information used to ensure that the organization has what it needs and has the ability to procure additional resources and assets should it experience a prolonged emergency.
I think the key thing to keep in mind (as when one is addressing each of the TJC-anointed critical functions) is to ensure that for each exercise or actual implementation, there is a process in place for evaluating performance in each of those areas. Someone should be looking at:
- Communications
- Staff roles and responsibilities
- Safety/security
- Utilities
- Patient care activities
- The management of resources and assets
And those someones (whoever they may be) need to be particularly forthcoming because (as we have learned over the years) it is not so much about what went right as it is about what opportunities can be identified to make the next time better. Too many times I’ve encountered folks that are reluctant to “air out the dirty laundry.” Identifying potential vulnerabilities is never a bad thing (true, it can make for some difficult discussions), it is the only thing.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Hospital Safety Insider!
Related Products
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- Don't forget the three checks in medication administration
- Five ways to safeguard your patients' valuables
- Note similarities and differences between HCPCS, CPT® codes
- The consequences of an incomplete medical record
- Q&A: Primary, principal, and secondary diagnoses
- Skills of effective case managers
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- Nursing responsibilities for managing pain
- Practice the six rights of medication administration
- Reimbursement for Facility and Professional Services in a Provider-Based Department by Gina M. Reese, Esq., RN
- E-mailed
-
- Plan of Care Supports Documentation of Homebound Status
- Q/A: Coding infusions to correct low potassium levels
- Note from the instructor: CMS clarifies billing guidelines on proper billing for drugs in a single-dose or single-use vial, including billing for discarded drugs
- Neurological checks for head injuries
- Modifiers and medical necessity
- HIPAA Q&A: Cameras in patient rooms
- Follow these tips to properly report bladder catheter codes
- Examine cardboard boxes stored on floor to avoid infection control, life safety citations
- Differentiate between types of wound debridement
- Consider two options for coding Rho(D) immune globulin given in pregnancy
- Searched