Dataset Information

Leveraging Telemedicine Infrastructure to Monitor Quality of Operating Room to Intensive Care Unit Handoffs.

ABSTRACT: To analyze in-room video recordings of operating room (OR) to intensive care unit (ICU) handoffs to determine tempo and quality of team interactions on nights and weekends compared with weekdays, and to demonstrate how existing telemedicine technology can be used to evaluate handoffs.This prospective observational study of OR-to-ICU bedside handoffs was conducted in the surgical ICU of the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania in July 2014-January 2015. Handoff video recordings were obtained for quality improvement purposes using existing telemedicine cameras. Evaluators used adapted validated in-person assessment measures to analyze basic characteristics and quality measures (timing, report types, report duration, presence of physical exam, teamwork skills, engagement, report delivery skills, listening skills, interruptions, unprofessional comments or actions).Sixteen weekday and 16 night and weekend handoffs were compared. There were no significant differences in basic characteristics. Most quality measures were similar on weekdays compared with nights and weekends. Surgeons demonstrated better report delivery skills and engagement on nights and weekends (P = .002 and P = .04, respectively), whereas OR anesthesiologists' scores were similar during both time frames.This study presents a novel approach of assessing handoff quality in OR-to-ICU handoffs using an existing telemedicine infrastructure. Using this approach, quality measures of night and weekend handoffs were found to be no worse-and sometimes better-than those during weekdays. Video analysis may emerge as an ideal unobtrusive quality improvement methodology to monitor handoffs and improve education and compliance with institutional handoff policies.

SUBMITTER: Barry ME

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5912952 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Leveraging Telemedicine Infrastructure to Monitor Quality of Operating Room to Intensive Care Unit Handoffs.

Barry Mark E ME Hochman Beth R BR Lane-Fall Meghan B MB Zappile Denise D Holena Daniel N DN Smith Brian P BP Kaplan Lewis J LJ Huffenberger Ann A Reilly Patrick M PM Pascual Jose L JL

Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges 20170701 7

<h4>Purpose</h4>To analyze in-room video recordings of operating room (OR) to intensive care unit (ICU) handoffs to determine tempo and quality of team interactions on nights and weekends compared with weekdays, and to demonstrate how existing telemedicine technology can be used to evaluate handoffs.<h4>Method</h4>This prospective observational study of OR-to-ICU bedside handoffs was conducted in the surgical ICU of the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania in July 2014-January 2015. Handof ...[more]

PMID: 28198723

Similar Datasets

Project description:Operating room to intensive care unit handoffs are high-risk events for critically ill patients. Studies in selected patient populations show that standardizing operating room to intensive care unit handoffs improves information exchange and decreases errors. To adapt these findings to mixed surgical populations, we propose to study the implementation of a standardized operating room to intensive care unit handoff process in two intensive care units currently without an existing standard process.The Handoffs and Transitions in Critical Care (HATRICC) study is a hybrid effectiveness- implementation trial of operating room to intensive care unit handoffs. We will use mixed methods to conduct a needs assessment of the current handoff process, adapt published handoff processes, and implement a new standardized handoff process in two academic intensive care units. Needs assessment: We will use non-participant observation to observe the current handoff process. Focus groups, interviews, and surveys of clinicians will elicit participants' impressions about the current process. Adaptation and implementation: We will adapt published standardized handoff processes using the needs assessment findings. We will use small group simulation to test the new process' feasibility. After simulation, we will incorporate the new handoff process into the clinical work of all providers in the study units.Using the same methods employed in the needs assessment phase, we will evaluate use of the new handoff process.The primary effectiveness outcome is the number of information omissions per handoff episode as compared to the pre-intervention period. Additional intervention outcomes include patient intensive care unit length of stay and intensive care unit mortality. The primary implementation outcome is acceptability of the new process. Additional implementation outcomes include feasibility, fidelity and sustainability.The HATRICC study will examine the effectiveness and implementation of a standardized operating room to intensive care unit handoff process. Findings from this study have the potential to improve healthcare communication and outcomes for critically ill patients.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02267174. Date of registration October 16, 2014.

Project description:IntroductionPatient handover is a crucial transition requiring a high level of coordination and communication. In the BC Children's Hospital (BCCH) pediatric intensive care unit (PICU), 10 adverse events stemming from issues that should have been addressed at the operating room (OR) to PICU handover were reported into the patient safety learning system (PSLS) within 1 year. We aimed to undertake a quality improvement project to increase adherence to a standardized OR to PICU handover process to 100% within a 6-month time frame. In doing so, the secondary aim was to reduce adverse events by 50% within the same 6-month period.MethodsThe model for improvement and a Plan, Do, Study, Act method of quality improvement was used in this project. The adverse events were reviewed to identify root causes. The findings were reviewed by a multidisciplinary inter-departmental group comprised of members from surgery, anesthesia, and intensive care. Issues were batched into themes to address the most problematic parts of handover that were contributing to risk.InterventionA bedside education campaign was initiated to familiarize the team with an existing handover standard. The project team then formulated a new simplified visual handover tool with the mnemonic "PATHQS" where each letter denoted a step addressing a theme that had been noted in the pre-intervention work as contributing to adverse events.ResultsAdherence to standardized handover at 6 months improved from 69% to 92%. This improvement was sustained at 12 months and 3 years after the introduction of PATHQS. In addition, there were zero PSLS events relating to handover at 6 and 12 months, with only one filed by 36 months. Notably, staff self-reporting of safety concerns during handover reduced from 69% to 13% at 6 months and 0% at 3 years. The PATHQS tool created in this work also spread to six other units within the hospital as well as to one adult teaching hospital.ConclusionA simplified handover tool built collaboratively between departments can improve the quality and adherence of OR to PICU handover and improve patient safety. Simplification makes it adaptable and applicable in many different healthcare settings.

Project description:BackgroundClinical decision support systems and telemedicine for remote monitoring can together support clinicians' intraoperative decision-making and management of surgical patients' care. However, there has been limited investigation on patient perspectives about advanced health information technology use in intraoperative settings, especially an electronic OR (eOR) for remote monitoring and management of surgical patients.PurposeOur study objectives were: (1) to identify participant-rated items contributing to patient attitudes, beliefs, and level of comfort with eOR monitoring; and (2) to highlight barriers and facilitators to eOR use.MethodsWe surveyed 324 individuals representing surgical patients across the United States using Amazon Mechanical Turk, an online platform supporting internet-based work. The structured survey questions examined the level of agreement and comfort with eOR for remote patient monitoring. We calculated descriptive statistics for demographic variables and performed a Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test to assess whether participants were more comfortable with familiar clinicians from local hospitals or health systems monitoring their health and safety status during surgery than clinicians from hospitals or health systems in other regions or countries. We also analyzed open-ended survey responses using a thematic approach informed by an eight-dimensional socio-technical model.ResultsParticipants' average age was 34.07 (SD = 10.11). Most were white (80.9%), male (57.1%), and had a high school degree or more (88.3%). Participants reported a higher level of comfort with clinicians they knew monitoring their health and safety than clinicians they did not know, even within the same healthcare system (z = -4.012, p < .001). They reported significantly higher comfort levels with clinicians within the same hospital or health system in the United States than those in a different country (z = -10.230, p < .001). Facilitators and barriers to eOR remote monitoring were prevalent across four socio-technical dimensions: 1) organizational policies, procedures, environment, and culture; 2) people; 3) workflow and communication; and 4) hardware and software. Facilitators to eOR use included perceptions of improved patient safety through a safeguard system and perceptions of streamlined care. Barriers included fears of incorrect eOR patient assessments, decision-making conflicts between care teams, and technological malfunctions.ConclusionsParticipants expressed significant support for intraoperative telemedicine use and greater comfort with local telemedicine systems instead of long-distance telemedicine systems. Reservations centered on organizational policies, procedures, environment, culture; people; workflow and communication; and hardware and software. To improve the buy-in and acceptability of remote monitoring by an eOR team, we offer a few evidence-based guidelines applicable to telemedicine use within the context of OR workflow. Guidelines include backup plans for technical challenges, rigid care, and privacy standards, and patient education to increase understanding of telemedicine's potential to improve patient care.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare nurse preparedness and quality of patient handoff during interfacility transfers from a pretransfer emergency department to a PICU when conducted over telemedicine versus telephone.DesignCross-sectional nurse survey linked with patient electronic medical record data using multivariable, multilevel analysis.SettingTertiary PICU within an academic children's hospital.ParticipantsPICU nurses who received a patient handoff between October 2017 and July 2018.InterventionsNone.Main results and measurementsAmong 239 eligible transfers, 106 surveys were completed by 55 nurses (44% survey response rate). Telemedicine was used for 30 handoffs (28%), and telephone was used for 76 handoffs (72%). Patients were comparable with respect to age, sex, race, primary spoken language, and insurance, but handoffs conducted over telemedicine involved patients with higher illness severity as measured by the Pediatric Risk of Mortality III score (4.4 vs 1.9; p = 0.05). After adjusting for Pediatric Risk of Mortality III score, survey recall time, and residual clustering by nurse, receiving nurses reported higher preparedness (measured on a five-point adjectival scale) following telemedicine handoffs compared with telephone handoffs (3.4 vs 3.1; p = 0.02). There were no statistically significant differences in both bivariable and multivariable analyses of handoff quality as measured by the Handoff Clinical Evaluation Exercise. Handoffs using telemedicine were associated with increased number of Illness severity, Patient summary, Action list, Situation awareness and contingency planning, Synthesis by receiver components (3.3 vs 2.8; p = 0.04), but this difference was not significant in the adjusted analysis (3.1 vs 2.9; p = 0.55).ConclusionsTelemedicine is feasible for nurse-to-nurse handoffs of critically ill patients between pretransfer and receiving facilities and may be associated with increased perceived and objective nurse preparedness upon patient arrival. Additional research is needed to demonstrate that telemedicine during nurse handoffs improves communication, decreases preventable adverse events, and impacts family and provider satisfaction.

Project description:Alarm fatigue is a well-recognized patient safety concern in intensive care settings. Decreased nurse responsiveness and slow response times to alarms are the potentially dangerous consequences of alarm fatigue. The aim of this study was to determine the factors that modulate nurse responsiveness to critical patient monitor and ventilator alarms in the context of a private room neonatal intensive care setting.The study design comprised of both a questionnaire and video monitoring of nurse-responsiveness to critical alarms. The Likert scale questionnaire, comprising of 50 questions across thematic clusters (critical alarms, yellow alarms, perception, design, nursing action, and context) was administered to 56 nurses (90% response rate). Nearly 6000 critical alarms were recorded from 10 infants in approximately 2400 hours of video monitoring. Logistic regression was used to identify patient and alarm-level factors that modulate nurse-responsiveness to critical alarms, with a response being defined as a nurse entering the patient's room within the 90s of the alarm being generated.Based on the questionnaire, the majority of nurses found critical alarms to be clinically relevant even though the alarms did not always mandate clinical action. Based on video observations, for a median of 34% (IQR, 20-52) of critical alarms, the nurse was already present in the room. For the remaining alarms, the response rate within 90s was 26%. The median response time was 55s (IQR, 37-70s). Desaturation alarms were the most prevalent and accounted for more than 50% of all alarms. The odds of responding to bradycardia alarms, compared to desaturation alarms, were 1.47 (95% CI = 1.21-1.78; <0.001) while that of responding to a ventilator alarm was lower at 0.35 (95% CI = 0.27-0.46; p <0.001). For every 20s increase in the duration of an alarm, the odds of responding to the alarm (within 90s) increased to 1.15 (95% CI = 1.1-1.2; p <0.001). The random effect per infant improved the fit of the model to the data with the response times being slower for infants suffering from chronic illnesses while being faster for infants who were clinically unstable.Even though nurses respond to only a fraction of all critical alarms, they consider the vast majority of critical and yellow alarms as useful and relevant. When notified of a critical alarm, they seek waveform information and employ heuristics in determining whether or not to respond to the alarm.Amongst other factors, the category and duration of critical alarms along with the clinical status of the patient determine nurse-responsiveness to alarms.

Project description:Critically ill pediatric patients frequently require hemoglobin monitoring. Accurate noninvasive Hb (SpHb) would allow practitioners to decrease anemia from repeated blood draws, traumatic blood draws, and a decreased number of laboratory Hb (LabHb) medical tests. The Food and Drug Administration has approved the Masimo Pronto SpHb and associated Rainbow probes; however, its use in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) is controversial. In this study, we define the degree of agreement between LabHb and SpHb using the Masimo Pronto SpHb Monitor and identify clinical and demographic conditions associated with decreased accuracy.We performed a prospective, observational study in a large PICU at an academic medical center. Fifty-three pediatric patients (30-d and 18-y-old), weighing >3 kg, admitted to the PICU from January-April 2013 were examined. SpHb levels measured at the time of LabHb blood draw were compared and analyzed.Only 83 SpHb readings were obtained in 118 attempts (70.3%) and 35 readings provided a result of "unable to obtain." The mean LabHb and SpHb were 11.1 g/dL and 11.2 g/dL, respectively. Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean difference of 0.07 g/dL with a standard deviation of ±2.59 g/dL. Pearson correlation is 0.55, with a 95% confidence interval between 0.38 and 0.68. Logistic regression showed that extreme LabHb values, increasing skin pigmentation, and increasing body mass index were predictors of poor agreement between SpHb and LabHb (P < 0.05). Separately, increasing body mass index, hypoxia, and hypothermia were predictors for undetectable readings (P < 0.05).The Masimo Pronto SpHb Monitor provides adequate agreement for the trending of hemoglobin levels in critically ill pediatric patients. However, the degree of agreement is insufficient to be used as the sole indicator for transfusion decisions and should be used in context of other clinical parameters to determine the need for LabHb in critically ill pediatric patients.

Dataset Information

Leveraging Telemedicine Infrastructure to Monitor Quality of Operating Room to Intensive Care Unit Handoffs.

Publications

Leveraging Telemedicine Infrastructure to Monitor Quality of Operating Room to Intensive Care Unit Handoffs.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets