Improving Timely Antibiotic Administration for Pediatric Oncology Patients With Neutropenic Fever Seen in the Emergency Department.

Objective: To improve the care for pediatric oncology patients with neutropenic fever who present to the emergency department (ED) by administering appropriate empiric antibiotics within 60 minutes of arrival. Patients and Methods: We focused on improving the care for pediatric oncology patients at risk of neutropenia who presented to the ED with concern for fever. Our baseline adherence to the administration of empiric antibiotics within 60 minutes for this population was 53% (76/144) from January 1, 2010, to December 21, 2014. During 2015, we reviewed data monthly, finding 73% adherence. We used the Lean methodology to identify the process waste, completed a value-stream map with input from multidisciplinary stakeholders, and convened a root cause analysis to identify causes for delay. The 4 causes were as follows: (1) lack of staff awareness; (2) missing patient information in electronic medical record; (3) practice variation; and 4) lack of clear prioritization of laboratory draws. We initiated Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles to achieve our goal of 80% of patients receiving appropriate empiric antibiotics within 60 minutes of arrival in the ED. Results: Five Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles were completed, focusing on the following: (1) timely identification of patients by utilizing the electronic medical record to initiate a page to the care team; (2) creation of a streamlined intravascular access process; (3) practice standardization; (4) convenient access to appropriate antibiotics; and (5) care team education. Timely antibiotic administration increased from 73%-95% of patients by 2018. More importantly, the adherence was sustained to greater than 90% through 2021. Conclusion: A structured and multifaceted approach using quality improvement methodologies can achieve and sustain improved patient care outcomes in the ED.

Pilot Study of Kano "Attractive Quality" Techniques to Identify Change in Emergency Department Patient Experience.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We describe the use of the Kano Attractive Quality analytic tool to improve an identified patient experience gap in perceived compassion by emergency department (ED) providers. METHODS: In phase 1, point-of-service surveying assessed baseline patient perception of ED provider compassion. Phase 2 deployed Kano surveys to predict the effect of 4 proposed interventions on patient perception. Finally, phase 3 compared patients receiving standard care versus the Kano-identified intervention to assess the actual effect on patient experience. RESULTS: In phase 1, 193 of 200 surveys (97%) were completed, showing a baseline median score of 4 out of 5 (interquartile range [IQR] 3 to 5), with top box percentage of 33% for patients' perception of receiving compassionate care. In phase 2, 158 of 180 surveys (88%) using Kano-formatted questions were completed, and the data predicted that increasing shared decisionmaking would cause the greatest improvement in the patient experience. Finally, in phase 3, 45 of 49 surveys (92%) were returned and demonstrated a significant improvement in perceived concern and sensitivity, 5 (IQR 5 to 5) versus 4 (IQR 3 to 5) with a difference of 1 (95% CI 0.1-1.9) and a top box rating of 79% versus 35% with a difference of 44% (95% CI 12-66) by patients who received dedicated shared decisionmaking interventions versus those receiving standard of care. CONCLUSION: Kano analysis is likely predictive of change in patient experience. Kano methods may prove as useful in changing management of the health care industry as it has been in other industries.

Patient throughput benefits of triage liaison providers are lost in a resource-neutral model: a prospective trial.

OBJECTIVES: Patient throughput is an increasingly important cause of emergency department (ED) crowding. The authors previously reported shorter patient length of stay (LOS) when adding a triage liaison provider, which required additional personnel. Here, the objective was to evaluate the effect of moving a fast-track provider to the triage liaison role. METHODS: This was a prospective observational before-and-after study design with predefined outcomes measures. A "standard staffing" situation (where an advanced practice provider staffed treatment rooms in the fast track) was compared with an advanced practice provider performing the triage liaison staffing role, with no additional staff. Eleven intervention ("triage liaison staffing") days were compared with 11 matched control ("standard staffing") days immediately preceding the intervention. Total LOS was measured for all adult Emergency Severity Index (ESI) 3, 4, and 5 patients (excluding behavioral health patients), and results were compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum and chi-square tests. RESULTS: A total of 681 patients registered on control days and 599 on intervention days. There was no significant difference in total patient LOS: median = 273 minutes, interquartile range (IQR) 176 to 384 minutes on intervention days versus median = 253 minutes, IQR = 175 to 365 minutes on control days (p = 0.20). There was no difference in left-without-being-seen (LWBS) rates (n = 48, 7% on control days vs. n = 35, 6% on intervention days; p=0.38). Secondary analysis of only ESI 3 patients showed no difference in total LOS between periods (median = 284 minutes, IQR = 194 to 396 minutes on intervention days vs. median = 290 minutes, IQR = 217 to 397 minutes on control days; p = 0.22). There was, however, significantly greater total LOS for ESI 4 and 5 patients during the intervention period (median = 238 minutes, IQR = 124 to 350 minutes on intervention days vs. median = 192 minutes, IQR = 124 to 256 minutes on control days; p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: The previously reported benefits on patient LOS and LWBS rates after adding a triage liaison (resource additive) were lost when that provider was moved from fast track to the triage role (resource neutral). While the triage liaison provider role may be a way to improve ED throughput when additional resources are available, as evidenced by our prior study, the triage liaison model itself does not appear to replace the staffing of treatment rooms, as evidenced by this study.

A multifaceted intervention for patients with anaphylaxis increases epinephrine use in adult emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Studies have documented inconsistent emergency anaphylaxis care and low compliance with published guidelines. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate anaphylaxis management before and after implementation of an emergency department (ED) anaphylaxis order set and introduction of epinephrine autoinjectors, and to measure the effect on anaphylaxis guideline adherence. METHODS: A cohort study was conducted from April 29, 2008, to August 9, 2012. Adult patients in the ED who were diagnosed with anaphylaxis were included. ED management, disposition, self-injectable epinephrine prescriptions, allergy follow-up, and incidence of biphasic reactions were evaluated. RESULTS: The study included 202 patients. The median age of the patients was 45.3 years (interquartile range, 31.3-56.4 years); 139 (69%) were women. Patients who presented after order set implementation were more likely to be treated with epinephrine (51% vs 33%; odds ratio [OR] 2.05 [95% CI, 1.04-4.04]) and admitted to the ED observation unit (65% vs 44%; OR 2.38 [95% CI, 1.23-4.60]), and less likely to be dismissed home directly from ED (16% vs 29%, OR 0.47 [95% CI, 0.22-1.00]). Eleven patients (5%) had a biphasic reaction. Of these, 5 (46%) had the biphasic reaction in the ED observation unit; 1 patient was admitted to the intensive care unit. Six patients (55%) had reactions within 6 hours of initial symptom resolution, of whom 2 were admitted to the intensive care unit. CONCLUSIONS: Significantly higher proportions of patients with anaphylaxis received epinephrine and were admitted to the ED observation unit after introduction of epinephrine autoinjectors and order set implementation. Slightly more than half of the biphasic reactions occurred within the recommended observation time of 4 to 6 hours. Analysis of these data suggests that the multifaceted approach to changing anaphylaxis management described here improved guideline adherence.

Sustaining improvement in door-to-balloon time over 4 years: the Mayo clinic ST-elevation myocardial infarction protocol.

BACKGROUND: American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines recommend a door-to-balloon time (DTB) <90 minutes for nontransferred patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who undergo primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Systems of care to achieve and sustain this DTB performance over several years have not been previously reported. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Mayo Clinic STEMI protocol was implemented in April 2004 and included activation of the cardiac catheterization laboratory by the emergency medicine physician; a single call system to activate the catheterization laboratory; catheterization laboratory staff arrival within 20 to 30 minutes of activation; and real-time performance feedback within 24 to 48 hours. Data were collected on nontransferred STEMI patients. The preimplementation group (June 2002 to March 2004) comprised 96 patients with a median DTB of 97 (interquartile range, 82, 130) minutes, and 40% had a DTB <90 minutes. The postimplementation group (May 2004 to March 2008) comprised 322 patients with a median DTB of 67 (interquartile range, 55, 82) minutes, and 81% had a DTB <90 minutes. Postimplementation DTB was significantly shorter than preimplementation DTB (P<0.001). In the 4-year follow-up after protocol implementation, the DTB performance remained stable over time (P=0.41). CONCLUSIONS: The Mayo Clinic STEMI protocol implemented strategies to reduce DTB for nontransferred patients with STEMI. DTB was significantly reduced, and the results were sustained over the 4-year follow-up period. Our experience demonstrates the effectiveness and durability of process changes targeting timeliness of primary percutaneous coronary intervention.