Implementing a Family-Centered Rounds Intervention Using Novel Mentor-Trios.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patient and Family Centered I-PASS (PFC I-PASS) emphasizes family and nurse engagement, health literacy, and structured communication on family-centered rounds organized around the I-PASS framework (Illness severity-Patient summary-Action items-Situational awareness-Synthesis by receiver). We assessed adherence, safety, and experience after implementing PFC I-PASS using a novel "Mentor-Trio" implementation approach with multidisciplinary parent-nurse-physician teams coaching sites. METHODS: Hybrid Type II effectiveness-implementation study from 2/29/19-3/13/22 with ≥3 months of baseline and 12 months of postimplementation data collection/site across 21 US community and tertiary pediatric teaching hospitals. We conducted rounds observations and surveyed nurses, physicians, and Arabic/Chinese/English/Spanish-speaking patients/parents. RESULTS: We conducted 4557 rounds observations and received 2285 patient/family, 1240 resident, 819 nurse, and 378 attending surveys. Adherence to all I-PASS components, bedside rounding, written rounds summaries, family and nurse engagement, and plain language improved post-implementation (13.0%-60.8% absolute increase by item), all P < .05. Except for written summary, improvements sustained 12 months post-implementation. Resident-reported harms/1000-resident-days were unchanged overall but decreased in larger hospitals (116.9 to 86.3 to 72.3 pre versus early- versus late-implementation, P = .006), hospitals with greater nurse engagement on rounds (110.6 to 73.3 to 65.3, P < .001), and greater adherence to I-PASS structure (95.3 to 73.6 to 72.3, P < .05). Twelve of 12 measures of staff safety climate improved (eg, "excellent"/"very good" safety grade improved from 80.4% to 86.3% to 88.0%), all P < .05. Patient/family experience and teaching were unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals successfully used Mentor-Trios to implement PFC I-PASS. Family/nurse engagement, safety climate, and harms improved in larger hospitals and hospitals with better nurse engagement and intervention adherence. Patient/family experience and teaching were not affected.

Developing a Responsive Transferable Model for Delivering Large-Scale Simulation Education to Inpatient Nursing Staff.

Implementing large-scale nursing continuing development programs for bedside staff can be operationally challenging. The aim of this project was to establish a sustainable simulation education program that is incorporated into staff nurses' work schedules and provides provisions to accommodate patient assignment coverage. This article describes the planning, implementation, and evaluation of a simulation program that was successfully delivered to 89% of nurses employed on four inpatient units at an academic medical center.

In their own words: Safety and quality perspectives from families of hospitalized children with medical complexity.

BACKGROUND: Children with medical complexity (CMC) experience adverse events due to multiorgan impairment, frequent hospitalizations, subspecialty care, and dependence on multiple medications/equipment. Their families are well-versed in care and can help identify safety/quality gaps to inform improvements. Although previous studies have shown families identify important safety/quality gaps in hospitals, studies of inpatient safety/quality experience of CMC and their families are limited. To address this gap and identify otherwise unrecognized, family-prioritized areas for improving safety/quality of CMC, we conducted a secondary qualitative analysis of safety reporting surveys among families of CMC. OBJECTIVE: Explore safety reports from families of hospitalized CMC to identify areas to improve safety/quality. DESIGNS, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: We analyzed free-text responses from predischarge safety reporting surveys administered to families of CMC at a quaternary children's hospital from April 2018 to November 2020. Using a qualitative descriptive approach, we categorized responses into standard clinical categories. Three team members inductively generated an initial codebook to apply iteratively to responses. Reviewers coded responses collaboratively, resolved discrepancies through consensus, and generated themes. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: Outcomes: family-reported areas of safety/quality improvement. MEASURES: pre-discharge family surveys. RESULTS: Two hundred and eight/two hundred and thirty-seven (88%) families completed surveys; 83 families offered 138 free-text safety responses about medications, feeds, cares, and other categories. Themes included unmet expectations of hospital care/environment, lack of consistency, provider-patient communication lapses, families' expertise about care, and the value of transparency. CONCLUSION: To improve care of CMC and their families, hospitals can manage expectations about hospital limitations, improve consistency of care/communication, acknowledge family expertise, and recognize that family-observed quality concerns can have safety implications. Soliciting family input can help hospitals improve care in meaningful, otherwise unrecognized ways.

Patient safety after implementation of a coproduced family centered communication programme: multicenter before and after intervention study

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether medical errors, family experience, and communication processes improved after implementation of an intervention to standardize the structure of healthcare provider-family communication on family centered rounds. DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter before and after intervention study. SETTING: Pediatric inpatient units in seven North American hospitals, 17 December 2014 to 3 January 2017. PARTICIPANTS: All patients admitted to study units (3106 admissions, 13171 patient days); 2148 parents or caregivers, 435 nurses, 203 medical students, and 586 residents. INTERVENTION: Families, nurses, and physicians coproduced an intervention to standardize healthcare provider-family communication on ward rounds ("family centered rounds"), which included structured, high reliability communication on bedside rounds emphasizing health literacy, family engagement, and bidirectional communication; structured, written real-time summaries of rounds; a formal training programme for healthcare providers; and strategies to support teamwork, implementation, and process improvement. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Medical errors (primary outcome), including harmful errors (preventable adverse events) and non-harmful errors, modeled using Poisson regression and generalized estimating equations clustered by site; family experience; and communication processes (eg, family engagement on rounds). Errors were measured via an established systematic surveillance methodology including family safety reporting. RESULTS: The overall rate of medical errors (per 1000 patient days) was unchanged (41.2 (95% confidence interval 31.2 to 54.5) pre-intervention v 35.8 (26.9 to 47.7) post-intervention, P=0.21), but harmful errors (preventable adverse events) decreased by 37.9% (20.7 (15.3 to 28.1) v 12.9 (8.9 to 18.6), P=0.01) post-intervention. Non-preventable adverse events also decreased (12.6 (8.9 to 17.9) v 5.2 (3.1 to 8.8), P=0.003). Top box (eg, "excellent") ratings for six of 25 components of family reported experience improved; none worsened. Family centered rounds occurred more frequently (72.2% (53.5% to 85.4%) v 82.8% (64.9% to 92.6%), P=0.02). Family engagement 55.6% (32.9% to 76.2%) v 66.7% (43.0% to 84.1%), P=0.04) and nurse engagement (20.4% (7.0% to 46.6%) v 35.5% (17.0% to 59.6%), P=0.03) on rounds improved. Families expressing concerns at the start of rounds (18.2% (5.6% to 45.3%) v 37.7% (17.6% to 63.3%), P=0.03) and reading back plans (4.7% (0.7% to 25.2%) v 26.5% (12.7% to 7.3%), P=0.02) increased. Trainee teaching and the duration of rounds did not change significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Although overall errors were unchanged, harmful medical errors decreased and family experience and communication processes improved after implementation of a structured communication intervention for family centered rounds coproduced by families, nurses, and physicians. Family centered care processes may improve safety and quality of care without negatively impacting teaching or duration of rounds. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02320175.

Parent-Provider Miscommunications in Hospitalized Children.

BACKGROUND: Miscommunications lead to medical errors and suboptimal hospital experience. Parent-provider miscommunications are understudied. OBJECTIVES: (1) Examine characteristics of parent-provider miscommunications about hospitalized children, (2) describe associations among parent-provider miscommunications, parent-reported errors, and hospital experience, and (3) compare parent and attending physician reports of parent-provider miscommunications. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of 471 parents of 0- to 17-year-old medical inpatients in a pediatric hospital between May 1, 2013 and October 1, 2014. At discharge, parents reported parent-provider miscommunication and type (selecting all applicable responses), overall experience, and errors during hospitalization. During discharge billing, the attending physicians (n = 52) of a subset of patients (n = 217) also reported miscommunications, enabling comparison of parent and attending physician reports. We used logistic regression to examine characteristics of parent-reported miscommunications; McNemar's test to examine associations between miscommunications, errors, and top-box (eg, "excellent") experience; and generalized estimating equations to compare parent- and attending physician-reported miscommunication rates. RESULTS: Parents completed 406 surveys (86.2% response rate). 15.3% of parents (n = 62) reported miscommunications. Parents of patients with nonpublic insurance (odds ratio: 1.99; 95% confidence interval: 1.03-3.85) and longer lengths of stay (odds ratio: 1.12; 95% confidence interval: 1.02-1.23) more commonly reported miscommunications. Parents reporting miscommunications were 5.3 times more likely to report errors and 78.6% less likely to report top-box overall experience (P < .001 for both). Among patients with both parent and attending physician surveys, 16.1% (n = 35) of parents and 3.7% (n = 8) of attending physicians reported miscommunications (P < .001). Both parents and attending physicians attributed miscommunications most often to family receipt of conflicting information. CONCLUSIONS: Parent-provider miscommunications were associated with parent-reported errors and suboptimal hospital experience. Parents reported parent-provider miscommunications more often than attending physicians did.

Parent and Provider Experience and Shared Understanding After a Family-Centered Nighttime Communication Intervention.

OBJECTIVE: To assess parent and provider experience and shared understanding after a family-centered, multidisciplinary nighttime communication intervention (nurse-physician brief, family huddle, family update sheet). METHODS: We performed a prospective intervention study at a children's hospital from May 2013 to October 2013 (preintervention period) and May 2014 to October 2014 (postintervention period). Participants included 464 parents, 176 nurses, and 52 resident physicians of 582 hospitalized 0- to 17-year-old patients. Pre- versus postintervention, we compared parent/provider top-box scores (eg, "excellent") for experience with communication across several domains; and level of agreement (shared understanding) between parent, nurse, and resident reports of patients' reason for admission, overnight medical plan, and overall medical plan, as rated independently by blinded clinician reviewers (agreement = 74.7%, kappa = .60). RESULTS: Top-box parent experience improved for 1 of 4 domains: Experience and Communication With Nighttime Doctors (23.6% to 31.5%). Top-box provider experience improved for all 3 domains, including Communication and Shared Understanding With Families (resident rated, 16.5% to 35.1%; nurse rated, 32.2% to 37.9%) and Experience, Communication, and Shared Understanding With Other Providers (resident rated, 20.3% to 35.0%; nurse rated, 14.7% to 21.5%). Independently rated shared understanding remained unchanged for most domains but improved for parent-nurse composite shared understanding (summed agreement for reason for admission, overall plan, and overnight plan; 36.2% to 48.2%) and nurse-resident shared understanding regarding reason for admission (67.1% to 71.2%) and regarding overall medical plan (45.0% to 58.6%). All P <.05. CONCLUSIONS: A family-centered, multidisciplinary nighttime communication intervention was associated with improvements in some, but not all, domains of parent/provider experience and shared understanding, particularly provider experience and nurse-family shared understanding. The intervention was promising but requires further refinement.

Parent-Reported Errors and Adverse Events in Hospitalized Children.

IMPORTANCE: Limited data exist regarding the incidence and nature of patient- and family-reported medical errors, particularly in pediatrics. OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency with which parents experience patient safety incidents and the proportion of reported incidents that meet standard definitions of medical errors and preventable adverse events (AEs). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a prospective cohort study from May 2013 to October 2014 within 2 general pediatric units at a children's hospital. Included in the study were English-speaking parents (N = 471) of randomly selected inpatients (ages 0-17 years) prior to discharge. Parents reported via written survey whether their child experienced any safety incidents during hospitalization. Two physician reviewers classified incidents as medical errors, other quality issues, or exclusions (κ = 0.64; agreement = 78%). They then categorized medical errors as harmful (ie, preventable AEs) or nonharmful (κ = 0.77; agreement = 89%). We analyzed errors/AEs using descriptive statistics and explored predictors of parent-reported errors using bivariate statistics. We subsequently reviewed patient medical records to determine the number of parent-reported errors that were present in the medical record. We obtained demographic/clinical data from hospital administrative records. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Medical errors and preventable AEs. RESULTS: The mean (SD) age of the 383 parents surveyed was 36.6 (8.9) years; most respondents (n = 266) were female. Of 383 parents surveyed (81% response rate), 34 parents (8.9%) reported 37 safety incidents. Among these, 62% (n = 23, 6.0 per 100 admissions) were determined to be medical errors on physician review, 24% (n = 9) were determined to be other quality problems, and 14% (n = 5) were determined to be neither. Thirty percent (n = 7, 1.8 per 100 admissions) of medical errors caused harm (ie, were preventable AEs). On bivariate analysis, children with medical errors appeared to have longer lengths of stay (median [interquartile range], 2.9 days [2.2-6.9] vs 2.5 days [1.9-4.1]; P = .04), more often had a metabolic (14.3% vs 3.0%; P = .04) or neuromuscular (14.3% vs 3.6%; P = .05) condition, and more often had an annual household income greater than $100,000 (38.1% vs 30.1%; P = .06) than those without errors. Fifty-seven percent (n = 13) of parent-reported medical errors were also identified on subsequent medical record review. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Parents frequently reported errors and preventable AEs, many of which were not otherwise documented in the medical record. Families are an underused source of data about errors, particularly preventable AEs. Hospitals may wish to consider incorporating family reports into routine safety surveillance systems.

Communication and Shared Understanding Between Parents and Resident-Physicians at Night.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Communication breakdowns between members of the health care team compromise patient safety and experience. Communication breakdowns with parents, an important but often overlooked part of the health care team, are understudied. Parents may play a particularly important role in nighttime care given decreased staffing and inadequate transitions of care at night. We studied communication breakdowns evidenced by lack of shared understanding between parents and night-team residents about the reason for admission and care plan. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of parents (n = 286) and night-team senior residents (n = 34) from May 1, 2013 to October 31, 2013. Parents and residents rated communication and described patients' reason for admission, overall plan, and overnight plan. Two physician investigators independently reviewed (κ = 0.63) resident-parent dyads, assigned subsequently dichotomized 4-point overall agreement scores, and rated plan complexity. Using clustered logistic regression, we evaluated relationships among demographics, plan complexity, and shared understanding. We also examined resident and parent perceptions of shared understanding. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 257 parent-resident dyads. Among these, 45.1% were rated as lacking shared understanding (agreement score = 1 or 2). In multivariate analysis, higher plan complexity (P < .001) and length of stay (P = .002) were associated with lack of shared understanding; lower parental education was a borderline predictor (P = .05). When surveyed, parents and residents reported that they shared an understanding with one another about care plans in 86.0% and 73.1% of cases, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Parents and night-team residents frequently lack shared understanding. Family-centered care initiatives to improve parent-provider communication and shared understanding may help empower parents as partners in safe and high-quality nighttime care.

Physician and Nurse Nighttime Communication and Parents' Hospital Experience.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Night teams of hospital providers have become more common in the wake of resident physician duty hour changes. We sought to examine relationships between nighttime communication and parents' inpatient experience. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of parents (n = 471) of pediatric inpatients (0-17 years) from May 2013 to October 2014. Parents rated their overall experience, understanding of the medical plan, quality of nighttime doctors' and nurses' communication with them, and quality of nighttime communication between doctors and nurses. We tested the reliability of each of these 5 constructs (Cronbach's α for each >.8). Using logistic regression models, we examined rates and predictors of top-rated hospital experience. RESULTS: Parents completed 398 surveys (84.5% response rate). A total of 42.5% of parents reported a top overall experience construct score. On multivariable analysis, top-rated overall experience scores were associated with higher scores for communication and experience with nighttime doctors (odds ratio [OR] 1.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-3.08), for communication and experience with nighttime nurses (OR 6.47; 95% CI, 2.88-14.54), and for nighttime doctor-nurse interaction (OR 2.66; 95% CI, 1.26-5.64) (P < .05 for each). Parents provided the highest percentage of top ratings for the individual item pertaining to whether nurses listened to their concerns (70.5% strongly agreed) and the lowest such ratings for regular communication with nighttime doctors (31.4% excellent). CONCLUSIONS: Parent communication with nighttime providers and parents' perceptions of communication and teamwork between these providers may be important drivers of parent experience. As hospitals seek to improve the patient-centeredness of care, improving nighttime communication and teamwork will be valuable to explore.