Quality improvement initiative for improved patient communication in an ED rapid assessment zone.

INTRODUCTION: Patient-clinician communication in the Emergency Department (ED) faces challenges of time and interruptions, resulting in negative effects on patient satisfaction with communication and failure to relieve anxiety. Our aim was to improve patient satisfaction with communication and to decrease related patient anxiety. METHODS: A multistage quality improvement (QI) initiative was conducted in the ED of Toronto General Hospital, a quaternary care centre in Ontario, Canada, from January to May 2018. We engaged stakeholders widely including clinicians, allied health and patients. We developed a 5-point Likert scale survey to measure patient and clinician rating of their communication experience, along with open-ended questions, and a patient focus group. Inductive analyses yielded interventions that were introduced through three Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles: (1) a clinician communication tool called Acknowledge-Empathize-Inform; (2) patient information pamphlets; and (3) a multimedia solution displaying patient-directed material. Our primary outcome was to improve patient satisfaction with communication and decrease anxiety by at least one Likert scale point over 6 months. Our secondary outcome was clinician-perceived interruptions by patients. We used statistical process control (SPC) charts to identify special cause variation and two-tailed Mann-Whitney U tests to compare means (statistical significance p<0.05). RESULTS: A total of 232 patients and 104 clinicians were surveyed over baseline and three PDSA cycles. Communication about wait times, ED process, timing of next steps and directions to patient areas were the most frequently identified gaps, which informed our interventions. Measurements at baseline and during PDSA 3 showed: patient satisfaction increased from 3.28 (5 being best; n=65) to 4.15 (n=59, p<0.0001). Patient anxiety decreased from 2.96 (1 being best; n=65) to 2.31 (n=59, p<0.001). Clinician-perceived interruptions by patients changed from 4.33 (5 being highest; n=30) to 4.18 (n=11, p=0.98) and did not meet significance. SPC charts showed special cause variation temporally associated with our interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Our pragmatic low-cost QI initiative led to statistically significant improvement in patient satisfaction with communication and decreased patient anxiety while narrowly missing our a priori improvement aim of one full Likert scale point.

How do emergency departments and emergency leaders catalyze positive change through quality improvement collaborations?

OBJECTIVES: Quality Improvement and Patient Safety (QIPS) plays an important role in addressing shortcomings in optimal healthcare delivery. However, there is little published guidance available for emergency department (ED) teams with respect to developing their own QIPS programs. We sought to create recommendations for established and aspiring ED leaders to use as a pathway to better patient care through programmatic QIPS activities, starting internally and working towards interdepartmental collaboration. METHODS: An expert panel comprised of ten ED clinicians with QIPS and leadership expertise was established. A scoping review was conducted to identify published literature on establishing QIPS programs and frameworks in healthcare. Stakeholder consultations were conducted among Canadian healthcare leaders, and recommendations were drafted by the expert panel based on all the accumulated information. These were reviewed and refined at the 2018 CAEP Academic Symposium in Calgary using in-person and technologically-supported feedback. RESULTS: Recommendations include: creating a sense of urgency for improvement; engaging relevant stakeholders and leaders; creating a formal local QIPS Committee; securing funding and resources; obtaining local data to guide the work; supporting QIPS training for team members; encouraging interprofessional, cross-departmental, and patient collaborations; using an established QIPS framework to guide the work; developing reward mechanisms and incentive structures; and considering to start small by focusing on a project rather than a program. CONCLUSION: A list of 10 recommendations is presented as guiding principles for the establishment and sustainable deployment of QIPS activities in EDs throughout Canada and abroad. ED leaders are encouraged to implement our recommendations in an effort to improve patient care.

OBJECTIF: L'amélioration de la qualité et la sécurité des patients (AQSP) joue un rôle important dans la correction des lacunes observées dans la prestation optimale de soins. Toutefois, les équipes de soins au service des urgences (SU) disposent de peu de documentation sur la conception de leurs propres programmes d'AQSP. L'étude avait donc pour objectif l'élaboration de recommandations conçues à l'intention des chefs de file, nouveaux ou confirmés, au SU, et présentées comme une voie à emprunter pour améliorer les soins aux patients, par l'application d'activités programmatiques d'AQSP, tout d'abord au sein du service, puis entre services, grâce à la collaboration. MÉTHODE: Un groupe d'experts composé de 10 cliniciens en médecine d'urgence, ayant des compétences particulières en AQSP et en pouvoir d'influence, a été mis sur pied. Un examen de cadrage a été entrepris à la recherche de publications sur l'établissement de programmes d'AQSP et de cadres de travail s'y rapportant, en soins de santé. Des consultations ont été menées avec les parties intéressées parmi les chefs de file en soins de santé au Canada, et le groupe d'experts a rédigé une version préliminaire de recommandations fondées sur l'ensemble de l'information recueillie. Celles-ci ont été examinées et améliorées durant le Symposium sur les affaires universitaires 2018 de l'ACMU, à Calgary, à la suite de rétroactions communiquées en personne ou par voie électronique. RÉSULTATS: Les recommandations portaient sur : l'éveil d'un sentiment d'urgence à l'égard de l'amélioration; la mobilisation d'intervenants et de chefs de file compétents; la mise sur pied d'un comité local structuré d'AQSP; l'obtention de financement et de ressources; la disponibilité de données locales pour orienter le travail; le soutien de la formation des membres d'équipe en AQSP; la promotion de la collaboration entre professions, entre services et avec les patients; l'utilisation d'un cadre de travail d'AQSP déjà établi afin d'orienter le travail; l'élaboration d'un système de récompenses et de structures incitatives; la possibilité d'entreprendre, au début, des initiatives à petite échelle, soit des projets plutôt que des programmes. CONCLUSION: Les dix recommandations ont été présentées à titre de principes directeurs en vue de l'élaboration d'activités d'AQSP et de leur mise en œuvre durable dans les SU, au Canada et ailleurs dans le monde. Les chefs de file dans les SU sont invités à appliquer ces recommandations dans le but d'améliorer les soins aux patients.