Application of a Human Factors and Systems Engineering Approach to Explore Care Transitions of Sepsis Survivors From Hospital to Home Health Care.

STUDY AIM: This study aims to describe the transition-in-care work process for sepsis survivors going from hospitals to home health care (HHC) and identify facilitators and barriers to enable practice change and safe care transitions using a human factors and systems engineering approach. BACKGROUND: Despite high readmission risk for sepsis survivors, the transition-in-care work process from hospitals to HHC has not been described. METHODS: We analyzed semi-structured needs assessment interviews with 24 stakeholders involved in transitioning sepsis survivors from two hospitals and one affiliated HHC agency participating in the parent implementation science study, I-TRANSFER. The qualitative data analysis was guided by the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) framework to describe the work process and identify work system elements. RESULTS: We identified 31 tasks characterized as decision making, patient education, communication, information, documentation, and scheduling tasks. Technological and organizational facilitators lacked in HHC compared to the hospitals. Person and organization elements in HHC had the most barriers but few facilitators. Additionally, we identified specific task barriers that could hinder sepsis information transfer from hospitals to HHC. CONCLUSION: This study explored the complex transition-in-care work processes for sepsis survivors going from hospitals to HHC. We identified barriers, facilitators, and critical areas for improvement to enable implementation and ensure safe care transitions. A key finding was the sepsis information transfer deficit, highlighting a critical issue for future study. APPLICATION: We recommend using the SEIPS framework to explore complex healthcare work processes before the implementation of evidence-based interventions.

The Role and Initiatives Led by the Sepsis Coordinator to Improve Sepsis Bundle Compliance and Care Across the Continuum.

A dedicated sepsis coordinator role at Penn Medicine Lancaster General Hospital led initiatives to improve sepsis core measure compliance by 40% during the course of 4 years with submission of all sepsis cases. Chart abstraction and analysis of noncompliant cases identified areas for improvement: early recognition education, order set revisions, documentation support, and the implementation of a nurse-driven 24/7 sepsis monitoring process. The cooperative work with Penn Medicine affiliates, sharing best practices, improves overall sepsis bundle compliance and transitions of care. Ongoing achievements acknowledge the value of building relationships and leading improvements through the collaborative efforts of interprofessional teams.

Efficient and accurate measurement of physical restraint use in acute care.

OBJECTIVES: Describe and evaluate a method for assessing whether physical restraint prevalence differs by timing and frequency of data collection and to determine the minimum period of observation necessary to provide accurate prevalence estimates on both Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and medical-surgical units. DESIGN: Two-period, cross-sectional design with repeated observations in year 1 for 18 consecutive days and in year 2 for 21 consecutive days with method modifications. SETTING: 400-bed urban teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: All beds on general medical, surgical, and intensive care units. MEASUREMENT: Direct observation of patients, nurse interview, and medical record review conducted by trained observers. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in mean restraint use prevalence rates comparing: (a) morning and evening periods; (b) weekdays and weekend days; and (c) observation periods of 7, 14, or 21 consecutive days or for 7 days using every 3rd day on either medical-surgical units or ICUs. Analyses using data from an increasing number of days of observation indicates that the mean prevalence rate stabilizes after 16 days. There were larger mean differences for comparisons on ICU-ventilator units and lack of significant differences may be due to low statistical power. CONCLUSION: Direct observation by trained observers, supplemented by nurse report and medical record documentation over brief monitoring periods, results in accurate, nonintrusive, cost-efficient estimates of physical restraint prevalence. As few as seven consecutive or nonconsecutive days in measuring restraint prevalence is sufficient to obtain accurate estimates, although the number of days may vary depending on patient mix and unit type.