A Patient Outcomes-Driven Feedback Platform for Emergency Medicine Clinicians: Human-Centered Design and Usability Evaluation of Linking Outcomes Of Patients (LOOP).

BACKGROUND: The availability of patient outcomes-based feedback is limited in episodic care environments such as the emergency department. Emergency medicine (EM) clinicians set care trajectories for a majority of hospitalized patients and provide definitive care to an even larger number of those discharged into the community. EM clinicians are often unaware of the short- and long-term health outcomes of patients and how their actions may have contributed. Despite large volumes of patients and data, outcomes-driven learning that targets individual clinician experiences is meager. Integrated electronic health record (EHR) systems provide opportunity, but they do not have readily available functionality intended for outcomes-based learning. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to unlock insights from routinely collected EHR data through the development of an individualizable patient outcomes feedback platform for EM clinicians. Here, we describe the iterative development of this platform, Linking Outcomes Of Patients (LOOP), under a human-centered design framework, including structured feedback obtained from its use. METHODS: This multimodal study consisting of human-centered design studios, surveys (24 physicians), interviews (11 physicians), and a LOOP application usability evaluation (12 EM physicians for ≥30 minutes each) was performed between August 2019 and February 2021. The study spanned 3 phases: (1) conceptual development under a human-centered design framework, (2) LOOP technical platform development, and (3) usability evaluation comparing pre- and post-LOOP feedback gathering practices in the EHR. RESULTS: An initial human-centered design studio and EM clinician surveys revealed common themes of disconnect between EM clinicians and their patients after the encounter. Fundamental postencounter outcomes of death (15/24, 63% respondents identified as useful), escalation of care (20/24, 83%), and return to ED (16/24, 67%) were determined high yield for demonstrating proof-of-concept in our LOOP application. The studio aided the design and development of LOOP, which integrated physicians throughout the design and content iteration. A final LOOP prototype enabled usability evaluation and iterative refinement prior to launch. Usability evaluation compared to status quo (ie, pre-LOOP) feedback gathering practices demonstrated a shift across all outcomes from "not easy" to "very easy" to obtain and from "not confident" to "very confident" in estimating outcomes after using LOOP. On a scale from 0 (unlikely) to 10 (most likely), the users were very likely (9.5) to recommend LOOP to a colleague. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the potential for human-centered design of a patient outcomes-driven feedback platform for individual EM providers. We have outlined a framework for working alongside clinicians with a multidisciplined team to develop and test a tool that augments their clinical experience and enables closed-loop learning.

The Role of Healthcare Worker-Mediated Contact Networks in the Transmission of Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci.

BACKGROUND: User- and time-stamped data from hospital electronic health records (EHRs) present opportunities to evaluate how healthcare worker (HCW)-mediated contact networks impact transmission of multidrug-resistant pathogens, such as vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE). METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of incident acquisitions of VRE between July 1, 2016 and June 30, 2018. Clinical and demographic patient data were extracted from the hospital EHR system, including all recorded HCW contacts with patients. Contacts by an HCW with 2 different patients within 1 hour was considered a "connection". Incident VRE acquisition was determined by positive clinical or surveillance cultures collected ≥72 hours after a negative surveillance culture. RESULTS: There were 2952 hospitalizations by 2364 patients who had ≥2 VRE surveillance swabs, 112 (4.7%) patients of which had incident nosocomial acquisitions. Patients had a median of 24 (interquartile range [IQR], 18-33) recorded HCW contacts per day, 9 (IQR, 5-16) of which, or approximately 40%, were connections that occurred <1 hour after another patient contact. Patients that acquired VRE had a higher average number of daily connections to VRE-positive patients (3.1 [standard deviation {SD}, 2.4] versus 2.0 [SD, 2.1]). Controlling for other risk factors, connection to a VRE-positive patient was associated with increased odds of acquiring VRE (odds ratio, 1.64; 95% confidence interval, 1.39-1.92). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that EHR data can be used to quantify the impact of HCW-mediated patient connections on transmission of VRE in the hospital. Defining incident acquisition risk of multidrug-resistant organisms through HCWs connections from EHR data in real-time may aid implementation and evaluation of interventions to contain their spread.