Dataset Information

Standardized Transfer Process for a Neurointensive Care Unit and Assessment of Patient Bounceback

ABSTRACT:

Background

Patients who require readmission to an intensive care unit (ICU) after transfer to a lower level of care (“bounceback”) suffer from increased mortality and longer hospital stays. We aimed to create a multifaceted standardized transfer process for patients moving from the neurointensive care unit (neuro-ICU) to a lower level of care. We hypothesized that this process would lead to improvement in provider-rated safety and a decreased rate of bouncebacks to the neuro-ICU after transfer.

Methods

The study took place at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania from October 2018 to October 2020. A standardized five-step transfer process was created and implemented for transferring patients from the neuro-ICU to a lower level of care. Patient care providers completed a survey before and after implementation of the protocol to assess a variety of components related to safety concerns when transferring patients. The rate of bouncebacks pre and post intervention was calculated by using a two-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and disposition at discharge was calculated by using Fisher’s exact test.

Results

Of the 1176 total patient transfers out of the neuro-ICU, 29 patients bounced back within 48 h. The average age of patients who bounced back was 63.3 years old, with a similar distribution among men and women. The most common reason for bounceback was respiratory distress, followed by cardiac arrhythmia, stroke, and sepsis. Implementation of the standardized process led to a decrease in provider-rated concern of overall safety (5 to 3, p = 0.008). There was improvement in transfer delays due to bed availability (3 to 4.5, p = 0.020), identification of high-risk patients (5 to 6, p = 0.021), patient assignment to the appropriate level of care (5 to 6, p = 0.019), and use of the electronic medical record handoff indicator (5 to 6, p = 0.003). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of patient bounceback rate after implementation of the process (2.4% vs. 2.5%, p = 1.00) or patient disposition at discharge (p = 0.553).

Conclusions

Patients who bounceback to the neuro-ICU within 48 h had an increased length of hospital stay, had an increased length of ICU stay, and were more likely to be intubated for more than 96 h. Implementation of a standardized five-step transfer process from the neuro-ICU to a lower level of care resulted in improvement in multiple provider-rated safety outcomes and identification of high-risk patients but led to no difference in the patient bounceback rate or patient disposition at discharge.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12028-021-01385-z.

SUBMITTER: Nathan C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8598102 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Hospital-acquired infections are common in neurointensive care units. We sought to review interventions which may reduce infection rates in neurocritically ill populations. We conducted a systematic review of studies targeting adult patients in neuro-intensive care units (neuro-ICUs) with an intervention designed to prevent ICU-acquired infections. Our outcome of interest was change in the prevalence or rates of infection between active and control arms of these studies. We excluded studies based on the following criteria: no English full-text version available; pediatric population; non-neurosciences ICU population; pre- or intraoperative methods to prevent infection; lack of discrete data for infection rates/prevalence; studies that were purely observational in nature and did not test an intervention; and studies performed in resource limited settings. We initially retrieved 3716 results by searching the following databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE via Ovid, and Cochrane CENTRAL via Ovid. No date or language limits were used in the search. Computerized deduplication was conducted using EndNote followed by a confirmatory manual review resulting in 3414 citations. An additional 19 manuscripts were identified through review of references. The screening process followed a standard protocol, using two screeners at the title/abstract level to determine relevance and at the full-text level to determine eligibility for inclusion. The 3427 titles/abstracts were independently screened by two board-certified neurointensivists to determine relevance for full-text review, and 3248 were rejected. The remaining 179 abstracts were reviewed in full text using predetermined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Ultimately, 75 articles met our inclusion criteria and were utilized in the final analysis. The reviewed literature highlights the need for collaborative, multi-disciplinary, and multi-pronged approaches to reduce infections. Rates of VRI, SSI, VAP, CAUTI, and CLABSI can approach zero with persistence and a team-based approach.

Project description:BackgroundInadequate assessment of the severity and urgency of medical problems is one of the factors contributing to unnecessary emergency department (ED) visits. The implementation of a software-based instrument for standardized initial assessment-Standardisierte medizinische Ersteinschätzung in Deutschland (SmED) (Standardized medical Initial Assessment in Germany in English)-aims to support health care professionals and steer patients toward the right health care provider. This study aimed to explore the implementation process of SmED from a user perspective.ObjectiveThis study aims to evaluate the overall perception of SmED by health care professionals using the software, to examine to what extent SmED influences the workload and work routines of health care professionals, and to determine which factors are associated with the use of SmED.MethodsAn early qualitative process evaluation on the basis of interviews was carried out alongside the implementation of SmED in 26 outpatient emergency care services within 11 federal states in Germany. Participants were 30 health care professionals who work with SmED either at the joint central contact points of the outpatient emergency care service and the EDs of hospitals (ie, the Joint Counter; Gemeinsamer Tresen in German) or at the initial telephone contact points of the outpatient emergency care service (phone number 116117). Matrix-based framework analysis was applied to analyze the interview data.ResultsHealth care professionals perceived that workload increased initially, due to additional time needed per patient. When using SmED more frequently and over a longer time period, its use became more routine and the time needed per call, per patient, decreased. SmED was perceived to support decision making regarding urgency for medical treatment, but not all types of patients were eligible. Technical problems, lack of integration with other software, and lack of practicability during peak times affected the implementation of SmED.ConclusionsInitial experiences with SmED were positive, in general, but also highlighted organizational issues that need to be addressed to enhance sustainability.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register DRKS00017014; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00017014.