Dataset Information

Development of an App to Facilitate Communication and Shared Decision-making With Parents of Febrile Infants ≤ 60 Days Old.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

We aimed to develop and test a tool to engage parents of febrile infants ≤ 60 days of age evaluated in the emergency department (ED). The tool was designed to improve communication for all parents and to support shared decision-making (SDM) about whether to perform a lumbar puncture (LP) for infants 29 to 60 days of age.

Methods

We conducted a multiphase development and testing process: 1) individual, semistructured interviews with parents and clinicians (pediatric and general emergency medicine [EM] physicians and pediatric EM nurses) to learn their preferences for a communication and SDM tool; 2) design of a "storyboard" of the tool with design impression testing; 3) development of a software application (i.e., app) prototype, called e-Care; and 4) usability testing of e-Care, using qualitative assessment and the system usability scale (SUS).

Results

We interviewed 27 parents and 23 clinicians. Interviews revealed several themes, including that a communication tool should augment but not replace verbal communication; a Web-based format was preferred; and information about infections and testing, including the rationales for specific tests, would be valuable. We then developed separate versions of e-Care for infants ≤ 28 days and 29 to 60 days of age, in both English and Spanish. The e-Care app includes four sections: 1) homepage; 2) why testing is done; 3) what tests are done; and 4) what happens after testing, including a table for parents of infants 29 to 60 days of age to compare the risks/benefits of LP in preparation for an SDM conversation. Parents and clinicians reported that e-Care was understandable and helpful. The mean SUS score was 90.3 (95% confidence interval = 84 to 96.6), representing "excellent" usability.

Conclusions

The e-Care app is a useable and understandable tool to support communication and SDM with parents of febrile infants ≤ 60 days of age in the ED.

SUBMITTER: Aronson PL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7794092 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Young febrile infants are at substantial risk of serious bacterial infections; however, the current culture-based diagnosis has limitations. Analysis of host expression patterns ("RNA biosignatures") in response to infections may provide an alternative diagnostic approach.To assess whether RNA biosignatures can distinguish febrile infants aged 60 days or younger with and without serious bacterial infections.Prospective observational study involving a convenience sample of febrile infants 60 days or younger evaluated for fever (temperature >38° C) in 22 emergency departments from December 2008 to December 2010 who underwent laboratory evaluations including blood cultures. A random sample of infants with and without bacterial infections was selected for RNA biosignature analysis. Afebrile healthy infants served as controls. Blood samples were collected for cultures and RNA biosignatures. Bioinformatics tools were applied to define RNA biosignatures to classify febrile infants by infection type.RNA biosignatures compared with cultures for discriminating febrile infants with and without bacterial infections and infants with bacteremia from those without bacterial infections.Bacterial infection confirmed by culture. Performance of RNA biosignatures was compared with routine laboratory screening tests and Yale Observation Scale (YOS) scores.Of 1883 febrile infants (median age, 37 days; 55.7% boys), RNA biosignatures were measured in 279 randomly selected infants (89 with bacterial infections-including 32 with bacteremia and 15 with urinary tract infections-and 190 without bacterial infections), and 19 afebrile healthy infants. Sixty-six classifier genes were identified that distinguished infants with and without bacterial infections in the test set with 87% (95% CI, 73%-95%) sensitivity and 89% (95% CI, 81%-93%) specificity. Ten classifier genes distinguished infants with bacteremia from those without bacterial infections in the test set with 94% (95% CI, 70%-100%) sensitivity and 95% (95% CI, 88%-98%) specificity. The incremental C statistic for the RNA biosignatures over the YOS score was 0.37 (95% CI, 0.30-0.43).In this preliminary study, RNA biosignatures were defined to distinguish febrile infants aged 60 days or younger with vs without bacterial infections. Further research with larger populations is needed to refine and validate the estimates of test accuracy and to assess the clinical utility of RNA biosignatures in practice.

Project description:AIM:The aim of this study was to explore shared decision-making among residents, their families and staff to determine relevant strategies to support shared decision-making in long-term care (LTC). BACKGROUND:Meaningful engagement of long-term care home (LTCH) residents and their families in care decisions is key in the provision of quality of care. Shared decision-making is an interprofessional approach to increasing resident and family engagement in care decisions which can lead to higher quality decisions, more relevant care interventions and greater resident, family, and staff satisfaction. Despite these advantages, shared decision-making has not been widely implemented in practice in LTC. METHODS:The study took place in one LTCH in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. A qualitative descriptive design was used to explore how residents, family members and staff described how they collaborate when making decisions concerning resident care, and their perceptions of facilitators and challenges to a collaborative approach to decision-making. Individual interviews were conducted with nine participants: residents, families and staff. Data were analysed using content and thematic analysis. FINDINGS:Four main themes that described resident, family and staff perspectives of shared decision-making were as follows: (a) oral communication pathways for information sharing; (b) supporting resident decision-making autonomy; (c) relational aspects of care facilitate shared decision-making; and (d) lack of effective communication creates barriers to shared decision-making. CONCLUSION:As the demand for LTC continues to increase, it is crucial that healthcare providers engage in collaborative, relational practices that foster high-quality resident care. While a relational approach to care can facilitate shared decision-making, there are opportunities to further cultivate shared decision-making in LTCHs through more effective communication and collaboration. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE:Understanding how information is shared and decisions are made can facilitate shared decision-making in LTCHs. The strategies identified from this study could be further co-developed and implemented in LTCHs.

Project description:BackgroundGenetic testing allows patients and clinicians to understand the risk of hereditary diseases. By testing early, individuals can make informed medical decisions about management which may minimize the risk of developing certain diseases. Importantly, genetic test results may also be applicable to patients' biological relatives; thus, these results could also lead to minimizing their risk of disease. However, sharing genetic test results between patients and their relatives is scarce. The most frequently reported problems are that patients cannot clearly explain this information and relatives misinterpret the results. Smartphone apps in the healthcare field are a possible solution as they allow patients to accurately share sensitive information to others, while providing educational material to support understanding the information. However, these apps may not provide security to protect patients' identifiable information. We developed ShareDNA, a smartphone app that (1) allows patients to securely share their genetic test results with others, (2) provides information on how to interpret these results, and (3) minimizes the amount of patient information needed to use the service.ResultsWe recruited thirteen participants to test the usability of our app and provide feedback. We found overall that participants were comfortable with using this app and could easily learn each app function when filling out our questionnaire. Additionally, based on vocalized impressions of the usefulness of the app, participants indicated that the user-interface could be more intuitive and that we needed to add more text within the app to explain why ShareDNA is a secure service.ConclusionsShareDNA is a free smartphone app that allows patients to share their genetic test results with others, including their biological relatives. Sharing these results along with educational material will enable relatives to share accurate information and discuss their possible risk for disease with their clinical providers. As a result, appropriate testing in relatives could be improved.

Project description:ImportanceClinicians often risk stratify young febrile infants for invasive bacterial infections (IBIs), defined as bacteremia and/or bacterial meningitis, using complete blood cell count parameters.ObjectiveTo estimate the accuracy of individual complete blood cell count parameters to identify febrile infants with IBIs.Design, setting, and participantsPlanned secondary analysis of a prospective observational cohort study comprising 26 emergency departments in the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network from 2008 to 2013. We included febrile (≥38°C), previously healthy, full-term infants younger than 60 days for whom blood cultures were obtained. All infants had either cerebrospinal fluid cultures or 7-day follow-up.Main outcomes and measuresWe tested the accuracy of the white blood cell count, absolute neutrophil count, and platelet count at commonly used thresholds for IBIs. We determined optimal thresholds using receiver operating characteristic curves.ResultsOf 4313 enrolled infants, 1340 (31%; 95% CI, 30% to 32%) were aged 0 to 28 days, 2412 were boys (56%), and 2471 were white (57%). Ninety-seven (2.2%; 95% CI, 1.8% to 2.7%) had IBIs. Sensitivities were low for common complete blood cell count parameter thresholds: white blood cell count less than 5000/µL, 10% (95% CI, 4% to 16%) (to convert to 109 per liter, multiply by 0.001); white blood cell count ≥15 000/µL, 27% (95% CI, 18% to 36%); absolute neutrophil count ≥10 000/µL, 18% (95% CI, 10% to 25%) (to convert to × 109 per liter, multiply by 0.001); and platelets <100 × 103/µL, 7% (95% CI, 2% to 12%) (to convert to × 109 per liter, multiply by 1). Optimal thresholds for white blood cell count (11 600/µL), absolute neutrophil count (4100/µL), and platelet count (362 × 103/µL) were identified in models that had areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves of 0.57 (95% CI, 0.50-0.63), 0.70 (95% CI, 0.64-0.76), and 0.61 (95% CI, 0.55-0.67), respectively.Conclusions and relevanceNo complete blood cell count parameter at commonly used or optimal thresholds identified febrile infants 60 days or younger with IBIs with high accuracy. Better diagnostic tools are needed to risk stratify young febrile infants for IBIs.

Project description:ImportanceIn young febrile infants, serious bacterial infections (SBIs), including urinary tract infections, bacteremia, and meningitis, may lead to dangerous complications. However, lumbar punctures and hospitalizations involve risks and costs. Clinical prediction rules using biomarkers beyond the white blood cell count (WBC) may accurately identify febrile infants at low risk for SBIs.ObjectiveTo derive and validate a prediction rule to identify febrile infants 60 days and younger at low risk for SBIs.Design, setting, and participantsProspective, observational study between March 2011 and May 2013 at 26 emergency departments. Convenience sample of previously healthy febrile infants 60 days and younger who were evaluated for SBIs. Data were analyzed between April 2014 and April 2018.ExposuresClinical and laboratory data (blood and urine) including patient demographics, fever height and duration, clinical appearance, WBC, absolute neutrophil count (ANC), serum procalcitonin, and urinalysis. We derived and validated a prediction rule based on these variables using binary recursive partitioning analysis.Main outcomes and measuresSerious bacterial infection, defined as urinary tract infection, bacteremia, or bacterial meningitis.ResultsWe derived the prediction rule on a random sample of 908 infants and validated it on 913 infants (mean age was 36 days, 765 were girls [42%], 781 were white and non-Hispanic [43%], 366 were black [20%], and 535 were Hispanic [29%]). Serious bacterial infections were present in 170 of 1821 infants (9.3%), including 26 (1.4%) with bacteremia, 151 (8.3%) with urinary tract infections, and 10 (0.5%) with bacterial meningitis; 16 (0.9%) had concurrent SBIs. The prediction rule identified infants at low risk of SBI using a negative urinalysis result, an ANC of 4090/µL or less (to convert to ×109 per liter, multiply by 0.001), and serum procalcitonin of 1.71 ng/mL or less. In the validation cohort, the rule sensitivity was 97.7% (95% CI, 91.3-99.6), specificity was 60.0% (95% CI, 56.6-63.3), negative predictive value was 99.6% (95% CI, 98.4-99.9), and negative likelihood ratio was 0.04 (95% CI, 0.01-0.15). One infant with bacteremia and 2 infants with urinary tract infections were misclassified. No patients with bacterial meningitis were missed by the rule. The rule performance was nearly identical when the outcome was restricted to bacteremia and/or bacterial meningitis, missing the same infant with bacteremia.Conclusions and relevanceWe derived and validated an accurate prediction rule to identify febrile infants 60 days and younger at low risk for SBIs using the urinalysis, ANC, and procalcitonin levels. Once further validated on an independent cohort, clinical application of the rule has the potential to decrease unnecessary lumbar punctures, antibiotic administration, and hospitalizations.

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 has significantly altered health care delivery, requiring clinicians and hospitals to adapt to rapidly changing hospital policies and social distancing guidelines. At our large academic medical center, clinicians reported that existing information on distribution channels, including emails and hospital intranet posts, was inadequate to keep everyone abreast with these changes. To address these challenges, we adapted a mobile app developed in-house to communicate critical changes in hospital policies and enable direct telephonic communication between clinical team members and hospitalized patients, to support social distancing guidelines and remote rounding.ObjectiveThis study aimed to describe the unique benefits and challenges of adapting an app developed in-house to facilitate communication and remote rounding during COVID-19.MethodsWe adapted moblMD, a mobile app available on the iOS and Android platforms. In conjunction with our Hospital Incident Command System, resident advisory council, and health system innovation center, we identified critical, time-sensitive policies for app usage. A shared collaborative document was used to align app-based communication with more traditional communication channels. To minimize synchronization efforts, we particularly focused on high-yield policies, and the time of last review and the corresponding reviewer were noted for each protocol. To facilitate social distancing and remote patient rounding, the app was also populated with a searchable directory of numbers to patient bedside phones and hospital locations. We monitored anonymized user activity from February 1 to July 31, 2020.ResultsOn its first release, 1104 clinicians downloaded moblMD during the observation period, of which 46% (n=508) of downloads occurred within 72 hours of initial release. COVID-19 policies in the app were reviewed most commonly during the first week (801 views). Users made sustained use of hospital phone dialing features, including weekly peaks of 2242 phone number dials, 1874 directory searches, and 277 patient room phone number searches through the last 2 weeks of the observation period. Furthermore, clinicians submitted 56 content- and phone number-related suggestions through moblMD.ConclusionsWe rapidly developed and deployed a communication-focused mobile app early during COVID-19, which has demonstrated initial and sustained value among clinicians in communicating with in-patients and each other during social distancing. Our internal innovation benefited from our team's familiarity with institutional structures, short feedback loops, limited security and privacy implications, and a path toward sustainability provided by our innovation center. Challenges in content management were overcome through synchronization efforts and timestamping review. As COVID-19 continues to alter health care delivery, user activity metrics suggest that our solution will remain important in our efforts to continue providing safe and up-to-date clinical care.