Feasibility of interdisciplinary evaluation in non-arthritic hip pain: A randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Physical therapy and orthopaedic surgery are two common treatments for non-arthritic hip pain. Interdisciplinary evaluation across these disciplines may produce a more supportive treatment-planning process; however, the feasibility of such an evaluation remains unknown. HYPOTHESIS OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of an interdisciplinary evaluation with an orthopaedic surgeon and physical therapist for non-arthritic hip pain. STUDY DESIGN: Observational feasibility study of a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Participants were randomized to an interdisciplinary (surgeon + physical therapist) or standard (surgeon) evaluation in a hip preservation clinic. Recruitment rate was recorded. Retention rate was calculated for all variables of interest. Enrollment and refusal reasons were recorded as patient quotes and categorized by a single grader. Time spent in clinic was compared across groups using Mann Whitney U tests (P ≤ 0.05). Study clinicians were interviewed, and responses were categorized based on pre-determined themes. RESULTS: Eighty-one percent of eligible patients enrolled over a 15-month recruitment period. Willingness(n = 16), urgency to resolve pain(n = 10), financial compensation(n = 1), interest in research(n = 42), physical therapy(n = 6), or multiple-provider care(n = 15) were participants' enrollment reasons; reason was not recorded for 22 participants. Time(n = 11), preference for single-provider care(n = 6), current physical therapy treatment(n = 1), and disinterest in physical therapy(n = 7) or research(n = 2) were refusal reasons of patients who did not enroll. Retention for primary variables of interest was 100% in both groups. Participants spent, on average, 23.5 min more time in clinic for the interdisciplinary evaluation compared to the standard (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: An interdisciplinary evaluation for patients with non-arthritic hip pain that included a physical therapist and orthopaedic surgeon in a hip preservation clinic was feasible and may better inform the treatment planning process.

Perceptually Discriminating the Highest Priority Alarms Reduces Response Time: A Retrospective Pre-Post Study at Four Hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: Reduce nurse response time for emergency and high-priority alarms by increasing discriminability between emergency and all other alarms and suppressing redundant and likely false high-priority alarms in a secondary alarm notification system (SANS). BACKGROUND: Emergency alarms are the most urgent, requiring immediate action to address a dangerous situation. They are clinician-triggered and have higher positive predictive value (PPV). High-priority alarms are automatically triggered and have lower PPV. METHOD: We performed a retrospective pre-post study, analyzing data 15 months before and 25 months after a SANS redesign was implemented in four hospitals. For emergency alarms, we incorporated digitized human speech to distinguish them from automatically triggered alarms, leaving their onset and escalation pathways unchanged. For automatically triggered alarms, we suppressed some by delaying initial onset and escalation by 20 s. We used linear mixed models to assess the change in response time, Fisher's exact test for the proportion of response times longer than 120 s, and control charts for process stability. RESULTS: Response time for emergency alarms decreased at all hospitals (main, from 26.91 s to 22.32 s, p < .001; cardiac, from 127.10 s to 52.43 s, p < .001; cancer, from 18.03 s to 15.39 s, p < .001). Improvements were sustained. Automatically triggered alarms decreased 25.0%. Response time for the three automatically triggered cardiac alarms increased at the four hospitals. CONCLUSION: Auditory sound disambiguation was associated with a sustained reduced nurse response time for emergency alarms, but suppressing some high-priority automatically triggered alarms was not. APPLICATION: Distinguishing and escalating urgent, actionable alarms with higher PPV improves response time.

SCHEDULING DELAYED TREATMENT AND SURGERIES POST-PANDEMIC: A STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS.

Many are interested in how to safely ramp up elective surgeries after national, state, and voluntary shutdowns of operating rooms to minimize the spread of COVID-19 infections to patients and providers. We conducted an analysis of diverse perspectives from stakeholders regarding how to trade off risks and benefits to patients, healthcare providers, and the local community. Our findings indicate that there are a large number of different categories of stakeholders impacted by the post-pandemic decisions to reschedule delayed treatments and surgeries. For a delayed surgery, the primary stakeholders are the surgeon with expertise about the clinical benefits of undergoing an operation and the patient's willingness to tolerate uncertainty and the increased risk of infection. For decisions about how much capacity in the operating rooms and in the inpatient setting after the surgery, the primary considerations are minimizing staff infections, preventing patients from getting COVID-19 during operations and during post-surgical recovery at the hospital, conserving critical resources such as PPE, and meeting the needs of hospital staff for quality of life, such as child care needs and avoiding infecting members of their household. The timing and selection of elective surgery cases has an impact on the ability of hospitals to steward finances, which in turns affects decisions about maintaining employment of staff when operating rooms and inpatient rooms are not being used.

An Exploration of Contributing Factors to Patient Safety.

One in 3 patients is estimated to experience health care-related harm during hospitalization. This descriptive, cross-sectional study used the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire to measure interprofessional staff perceptions of safety and teamwork climate and a retrospective, modified Global Trigger Tool chart review methodology to measure unit-level patient outcomes. Safety climate and teamwork did not have a statistically significant relationship with the frequency of adverse events identified by the Global Trigger Tool. Researchers may consider the Global Trigger Tool for detecting unit-level adverse events.

An Image Analysis Resource for Cancer Research: PIIP-Pathology Image Informatics Platform for Visualization, Analysis, and Management.

Pathology Image Informatics Platform (PIIP) is an NCI/NIH sponsored project intended for managing, annotating, sharing, and quantitatively analyzing digital pathology imaging data. It expands on an existing, freely available pathology image viewer, Sedeen. The goal of this project is to develop and embed some commonly used image analysis applications into the Sedeen viewer to create a freely available resource for the digital pathology and cancer research communities. Thus far, new plugins have been developed and incorporated into the platform for out of focus detection, region of interest transformation, and IHC slide analysis. Our biomarker quantification and nuclear segmentation algorithms, written in MATLAB, have also been integrated into the viewer. This article describes the viewing software and the mechanism to extend functionality by plugins, brief descriptions of which are provided as examples, to guide users who want to use this platform. PIIP project materials, including a video describing its usage and applications, and links for the Sedeen Viewer, plug-ins, and user manuals are freely available through the project web page: http://pathiip.org Cancer Res; 77(21); e83-86. ©2017 AACR.

Implementation science for ambulatory care safety: a novel method to develop context-sensitive interventions to reduce quality gaps in monitoring high-risk patients.

BACKGROUND: Missed evidence-based monitoring in high-risk conditions (e.g., cancer) leads to delayed diagnosis. Current technological solutions fail to close this safety gap. In response, we aim to demonstrate a novel method to identify common vulnerabilities across clinics and generate attributes for context-flexible population-level monitoring solutions for widespread implementation to improve quality. METHODS: Based on interviews with staff in otolaryngology, pulmonary, urology, breast, and gastroenterology clinics at a large urban publicly funded health system, we applied journey mapping to co-develop a visual representation of how patients are monitored for high-risk conditions. Using a National Academies framework and context-sensitivity theory, we identified common systems vulnerabilities and developed preliminary concepts for improving the robustness for monitoring patients with high-risk conditions ("design seeds" for potential solutions). Finally, we conducted a face validity and prioritization assessment of the design seeds with the original interviewees. RESULTS: We identified five high-risk situations for potentially consequential diagnostic delays arising from suboptimal patient monitoring. All situations related to detection of cancer (head and neck, lung, prostate, breast, and colorectal). With clinic participants we created 5 journey maps, each representing specialty clinic workflow directed at evidence-based monitoring. System vulnerabilities common to the different clinics included challenges with: data systems, communications handoffs, population-level tracking, and patient activities. Clinic staff ranked 13 design seeds (e.g., keep patient list up to date, use triggered notifications) addressing these vulnerabilities. Each design seed has unique evaluation criteria for the usefulness of potential solutions developed from the seed. CONCLUSIONS: We identified and ranked 13 design seeds that characterize situations that clinicians described 'wake them up at night', and thus could reduce their anxiety, save time, and improve monitoring of high-risk patients. We anticipate that the design seed approach promotes robust and context-sensitive solutions to safety and quality problems because it provides a human-centered link between the experienced problem and various solutions that can be tested for viability. The study also demonstrates a novel integration of industrial and human factors methods (journey mapping, process tracing and design seeds) linked to implementation theory for use in designing interventions that anticipate and reduce implementation challenges.

Determining the rate of change in exposure to ionizing radiation from CT Scans: a database analysis from one hospital.

PURPOSE: Cancer risks associated with radiation from CT procedures have recently received increased attention. An important question is whether the combined impact of CT volume and dose reduction strategies has reduced radiation exposure to adult patients undergoing CT examinations. The aim of this study was to determine differences in radiation exposure from 2008 to 2012 to patients receiving CT scans of the abdomen, head, sinus, and lumbar spine at a midwestern academic medical center that implemented dose reduction strategies. METHODS: Data were collected from two internal data sets from 2008 to 2012 for general medicine and intensive care unit patients. These data were used to calculate annual CT volume, rate, average effective dose, radiation exposure, and estimated cancer risk. RESULTS: A 37% reduction in abdominal CT volume was found from 2008 to 2012. However, no volume reductions were found for CT examinations of the head or lumbar spine, and the decrease in sinus imaging was minimal. Dose reduction strategies resulted in 30% to 52% decreases in radiation exposure for the targeted body areas. The combined reduction in volume and dose per procedure reduced estimated induced cancers by 63%. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to ionizing radiation from these examinations was reduced at one institution because of reduced volumes of procedures and the reduction of each procedure's effective dose through new protocols and technologies. Although both the volume reduction and dose reduction strategies contributed to the reduced exposure, it seems that investments in implementing the protocols and new technology had the greatest effect on future cancer risk.

Reactions to a partner-assisted emotional disclosure intervention: direct observation and self-report of patient and partner communication.

Partner-assisted emotional disclosure is a couple-based intervention designed to help patients disclose cancer-related concerns to their spouses-partners. We previously found that, compared with an education/support control condition, partner-assisted emotional disclosure led to significant improvements in relationship quality and intimacy for couples in which the patient initially reported holding back from discussing cancer-related concerns (Porter et al., 2009, Cancer, 115, 4326-4338). The purpose of this study was to examine the process data from couples who participated in the disclosure sessions including (a) observational ratings of couples' communication during the sessions; (b) couples' ratings of their communication during the sessions; and (c) associations between participants' observed communication and their baseline psychological/relationship functioning. As rated by trained observers, couples' communication was in the moderate range of adaptive skills. Self-report data indicated that participants had positive perceptions of their communication. Observational and self-report ratings were weakly associated. Patients reporting lower levels of relationship quality, higher levels of holding back, and higher partner avoidance at baseline were rated by observers as more expressive during the sessions. Overall, these findings suggest that the intervention was acceptable to couples and was particularly helpful for patients who had difficulty talking with their partners on their own without skills training.

Registered nurses' judgments of the classification and risk level of patient care errors.

As frontline clinicians, nurses play a critical role in mitigating patient harm, recovery from health care errors, and overall improvement of patient safety. This cross-sectional study asked nurse respondents to make judgments about the classification and severity of errors in 4 clinical vignettes. Our results showed that agreement about error classification and associated risk among registered nurses is less than optimal. Further research is needed to advance our understanding of how nurses working in complex patient care situations can improve their ability to recognize subtle cues to facilitate early recognition of potential errors.

The "New Look" approach to patient safety: a guide for clinical nurse specialist leadership.

This article describes a complex system model based on human performance factors that is borrowed from other industries but can be used by clinical nurse specialists for making progress in patient safety. Traditional approaches to investigation and follow-up of errors in healthcare organizations have not resulted in improvement in patient safety. The New Look approach described in this article emphasizes the complexity in which healthcare workers make decisions about patient c are every day and how increased learning about the resiliency of healthcare workers in the face of multiple system gaps and discontinuities will lead to long-lasting improvements in safety. The article describes how the clinical nurse specialist can lead efforts using the New Look human performance-based approach in 4 areas: changing to a nonpunitive culture, learning about system complexity, learning about healthcare worker resiliency, and preparing for the complexity of introducing change.