Redesigning Rounds in the ICU: Standardizing Key Elements Improves Interdisciplinary Communication.

BACKGROUND: Daily multidisciplinary rounds (MDR) in the ICU represent a mechanism by which health care professionals from different disciplines and specialties can meet to synthesize data, think collectively, and form complete patient care plans. It was hypothesized that providing a standardized, structured approach to the daily rounds process would improve communication and collaboration in seven distinct ICUs in a single academic medical center. METHODS: Lean-inspired methodology and information provided by frontline staff regarding inefficiencies and barriers to optimal team functioning were used in designing a toolkit for standardization of rounds in the ICUs. Staff perceptions about communication were measured, and direct observations of rounds were conducted before and after implementation of the intervention. RESULTS: After implementation of the intervention, nurse participation during presentation of patient data increased from 17/47 (36.2%) to 56/78 (71.8%) (p < 0.0002) in the surgical ICUs and from 8/23 (34.8%) to 107/107 (100%) (p <0.0001) in the medical ICUs. Nurse participation during generation of the daily plan increased in the surgical ICUs from 24/47 (51.1%) to 63/78 (80.8%) (p = 0.0005) and from 7/23 (30.4%) to 106/107 (99.1%) (p < 0.0001) in the medical ICUs. Miscommunications and errors were corrected in nearly half of the rounding episodes observed. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that the implementation of a simple toolkit that can be incorporated into existing work flow and rounding culture in several different types of ICUs can result in improvements in engagement of nursing staff and in overall communication.

Speaking up about care concerns in the ICU: patient and family experiences, attitudes and perceived barriers.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about patient/family comfort voicing care concerns in real time, especially in the intensive care unit (ICU) where stakes are high and time is compressed. Experts advocate patient and family engagement in safety, which will require that patients/families be able to voice concerns. Data on patient/family attitudes and experiences regarding speaking up are sparse, and mostly include reporting events retrospectively, rather than pre-emptively, to try to prevent harm. We aimed to (1) assess patient/family comfort speaking up about common ICU concerns; (2) identify patient/family-perceived barriers to speaking up; and (3) explore factors associated with patient/family comfort speaking up. METHODS: In collaboration with patients/families, we developed a survey to evaluate speaking up attitudes and behaviours. We surveyed current ICU families in person at an urban US academic medical centre, supplemented with a larger national internet sample of individuals with prior ICU experience. RESULTS: 105/125 (84%) of current families and 1050 internet panel participants with ICU history completed the surveys. Among the current ICU families, 50%-70% expressed hesitancy to voice concerns about possible mistakes, mismatched care goals, confusing/conflicting information and inadequate hand hygiene. Results among prior ICU participants were similar. Half of all respondents reported at least one barrier to voicing concerns, most commonly not wanting to be a 'troublemaker', 'team is too busy' or 'I don't know how'. Older, female participants and those with personal or family employment in healthcare were more likely to report comfort speaking up. CONCLUSION: Speaking up may be challenging for ICU patients/families. Patient/family education about how to speak up and assurance that raising concerns will not create 'trouble' may help promote open discussions about care concerns and possible errors in the ICU.

Nurse Project Consultant: Critical Care Nurses Move Beyond the Bedside to Affect Quality and Safety.

A nurse project consultant role empowered 3 critical care nurses to expand their scope of practice beyond the bedside and engage within complex health care delivery systems to reduce harms in the intensive care unit. As members of an interdisciplinary team, the nurse project consultants contributed their clinical expertise and systems knowledge to develop innovations that optimize care provided in the intensive care unit. This article discusses the formal development of and institutional support for the nurse project consultant role. The nurse project consultants' responsibilities within a group of quality improvement initiatives are described and their challenges and lessons learned discussed. The nurse project consultant role is a new model of engaging critical care nurses as leaders in health care redesign.

An informatics research agenda to support patient and family empowerment and engagement in care and recovery during and after hospitalization.

As part of an interdisciplinary acute care patient portal task force with members from 10 academic medical centers and professional organizations, we held a national workshop with 71 attendees representing over 30 health systems, professional organizations, and technology companies. Our consensus approach identified 7 key sociotechnical and evaluation research focus areas related to the consumption and capture of information from patients, care partners (eg, family, friends), and clinicians through portals in the acute and post-acute care settings. The 7 research areas were: (1) standards, (2) privacy and security, (3) user-centered design, (4) implementation, (5) data and content, (6) clinical decision support, and (7) measurement. Patient portals are not yet in routine use in the acute and post-acute setting, and research focused on the identified domains should increase the likelihood that they will deliver benefit, especially as there are differences between needs in acute and post-acute care compared to the ambulatory setting.

Clinician Perspectives on an Electronic Portal to Improve Communication with Patients and Families in the Intensive Care Unit.

RATIONALE: Communication in the intensive care unit (ICU) often falls short of patient and family needs, putting them at risk for significant physical and emotional harm. As electronic patient portals rapidly evolve, one designed specifically for the ICU might potentially enhance communication among patients, family members, and clinicians; however, the views of frontline ICU staff on such technology are unknown. OBJECTIVES: To identify clinician perspectives on the current state of communication among patients, families, and clinicians in the ICU, and assess their views on whether and how an electronic portal may address existing communication deficits and improve care. METHODS: Three focus groups comprised altogether of 26 clinicians from 6 ICUs, representing several disciplines in an academic medical center in Boston, Massachusetts. Transcripts were analyzed inductively for major themes using grounded theory. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We identified seven themes reflecting clinician perspectives on communication challenges and desired portal functionality: (1) comprehension and literacy; (2) results and updates; (3) patient and family preferences; (4) interclinician communication; (5) family informational needs; (6) the ICU as an unfamiliar environment; and (7) enhancing humanism through technology. Each theme included current gaps in practice, potential benefits and concerns related to an ICU communication portal, and participant recommendations. Benefits included enhanced education, patient/family engagement, and clinician workflow. Challenges included the stress and uncertainty of ICU care, fear of technology replacing human connection, existing interclinician communication failures, and the tension between informing families without overwhelming them. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, clinicians were cautiously supportive of an electronic portal to enhance communication in the ICU and made several specific recommendations for design and implementation. As new technologies expand opportunities for greater transparency and participation in care, clinician buy-in and positive impact will depend, in large part, on the extent to which the concerns of stakeholders are addressed. At the same time, clinicians anticipate several potential benefits that could help support provider workflow and engage patients and families through enhanced communication and humanism.

Standard work for room entry: Linking lean, hand hygiene, and patient-centeredness.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare-associated infections are costly and fatal. Substantial front-line, administrative, regulatory, and research efforts have focused on improving hand hygiene. PROBLEM: While broad agreement exists that hand hygiene is the most important single approach to infection prevention, compliance with hand hygiene is typically only about 40%(1). GOALS: Our aim was to develop a standard process for room entry in the intensive care unit that improved compliance with hand hygiene and allowed for maximum efficiency. STRATEGY: We recognized that hand hygiene is a single step in a substantially more complicated process of room entry. We applied Lean engineering techniques to develop a standard process that included both physical steps and also standard communication elements from provider to patients and families and created a physical environment to support this. RESULTS: We observed meaningful improvement in the performance of the new standard as well as time savings for clinical providers with each room entry. We also observed an increase in room entries that included verbal communication and an explanation of what the clinician was entering the room to do. IMPLICATIONS: The design and implementation of a standardized room entry process and the creation of an environment that supports that new process has resulted in measurable positive outcomes on the medical intensive care unit, including quality, patient experience, efficiency, and staff satisfaction. Designing a process, rather than viewing tasks that need to happen in close proximity in time (either serially or in parallel) as unrelated, simplifies work for staff and results in higher compliance to individual tasks.

Preferences of Current and Potential Patients and Family Members Regarding Implementation of Electronic Communication Portals in Intensive Care Units.

RATIONALE: The quality of communication with patients and family members in intensive care units (ICUs) is a focus of current interest for clinical care improvement. Electronic communication portals are commonly used in other healthcare settings to improve communication. We do not know whether patients and family members desire such portals in ICUs, and if so, what functionality they should provide. OBJECTIVES: To define interest in and desired elements of an electronic communication portal among current and potential ICU patients and their family members. METHODS: We surveyed, via an Internet panel, 1,050 English-speaking adults residing in the United States with a personal or family history of an ICU admission within 10 years (cohort A) and 1,050 individuals without a history of such admission (cohort B). We also administered a survey instrument in person to 105 family members of patients currently admitted to ICUs at an academic medical center in Boston (cohort C). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Respondents, especially current ICU family members, supported an electronic communication portal, including access via an electronic tablet. They wanted at least daily updates, one-paragraph summaries of family meetings including a list of key decisions made, and knowledge of the role and experience of treating clinicians. Overall, they preferred detailed rather than "big picture" information. Respondents were generally comfortable sharing information with their family members. Preferences regarding a communication portal varied significantly by age, sex, ethnicity, and prior experience with ICU hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic communication portals appear welcome in contemporary ICUs. Frequent updates, knowledge about the professional qualifications of clinicians, detailed medical information, and documentation of family meetings are particularly desired.

Seasonal variation in family member perceptions of physician competence in the intensive care unit: findings from one academic medical center.

PURPOSE: Researchers have found mixed results about the risk to patient safety in July, when newly minted physicians enter U.S. hospitals to begin their clinical training, the so-called "July effect." However, patient and family satisfaction and perception of physician competence during summer months remain unknown. METHOD: The authors conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of 815 family members of adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients who completed the Family Satisfaction with Care in the Intensive Care Unit instrument from eight ICUs at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, between April 2008 and June 2011. The association of ICU care in the summer months (July-September) versus other seasons and family perception of physician competence was examined in univariable and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: A greater proportion of family members described physicians as competent in summer months as compared with winter months (odds ratio [OR] 1.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-3.0; P = .003). After adjustment for patient and proxy demographics, severity of illness, comorbidities, and features of the admission in a multivariable model, seasonal variation of family perception of physician competence persisted (summer versus winter, OR of judging physicians competent 2.4; 95% CI 1.3-4.4; P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: Seasonal variation exists in family perception of physician competence in the ICU, but opposite to the "July effect." The reasons for this variation are not well understood. Further research is necessary to explore the role of senior provider involvement, trainee factors, system factors such as handoffs, or other possible contributors.