Measuring Sensitivity and Precision of Real-Time Location Systems (RTLS): Definition, Protocol and Demonstration for Clinical Relevance.

The ability of a Real Time Location System (RTLS) to provide correct information in a clinical environment is an important consideration in evaluating the effectiveness of the technology. While past efforts describe how well the technology performed in a lab environment, the performance of such technology has not been specifically defined or evaluated in a practice setting involving workflow and movement. Clinical environments pose complexity owing to various layouts and various movements. Further, RTL systems are not equipped to provide true negative information (where an entity is not located). Hence, this study defined sensitivity and precision in this context, and developed a simulation protocol to serve as a systematic testing framework using actors in a clinical environment. The protocol was used to measure the sensitivity and precision of an RTL system in the emergency department space of a quaternary care medical center. The overall sensitivity and precision were determined to be 84 and 93% respectively. These varied for patient rooms, staff area, hallway and other rooms.

Attitudes and Behavior of Health Care Workers Before, During, and After Implementation of Real-Time Location System Technology.

OBJECTIVE: To assess how staff attitudes before, during, and after implementation of a real-time location system (RTLS) that uses radio-frequency identification tags on staff and patient identification badges and on equipment affected staff's intention to use and actual use of an RTLS. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: A series of 3 online surveys were sent to staff at an emergency department with plans to implement an RTLS between June 1, 2015, and November 29, 2016. Each survey corresponded with a different phase of implementation: preimplementation, midimplementation, and postimplementation. Multiple logistic regression with backward elimination was used to assess the relationship between demographic variables, attitudes about RTLSs, and intention to use or actual use of an RTLS. RESULTS: Demographic variables were not associated with intention to use or actual use of the RTLS. Before implementation, poor perceptions about the technology's usefulness and lack of trust in how employers would use tracking data were associated with weaker intentions to use the RTLS. During and after implementation, attitudes about the technology's use, not issues related to autonomy and privacy, were associated with less use of the technology. CONCLUSION: Real-time location systems have the potential to assess patterns of health care delivery that could be modified to reduce costs and improve the quality of care. Successful implementation, however, may hinge on how staff weighs attitudes and concerns about their autonomy and personal privacy with organizational goals. With the large investments required for new technology, serious consideration should be given to address staff attitudes about privacy and technology in order to assure successful implementation.

Contact tracing with a real-time location system: A case study of increasing relative effectiveness in an emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Contact tracing is the systematic method of identifying individuals potentially exposed to infectious diseases. Electronic medical record (EMR) use for contact tracing is time-consuming and may miss exposed individuals. Real-time location systems (RTLSs) may improve contact identification. Therefore, the relative effectiveness of these 2 contact tracing methodologies were evaluated. METHODS: During a pertussis outbreak in the United States, a retrospective case study was conducted between June 14 and August 31, 2016, to identify the contacts of confirmed pertussis cases, using EMR and RTLS data in the emergency department of a tertiary care medical center. Descriptive statistics and a paired t test (α = 0.05) were performed to compare contacts identified by EMR versus RTLS, as was correlation between pertussis patient length of stay and the number of potential contacts. RESULTS: Nine cases of pertussis presented to the emergency department during the identified time period. RTLS doubled the potential exposure list (P < .01). Length of stay had significant positive correlation with contacts identified by RTLS (ρ = 0.79; P = .01) but not with EMR (ρ = 0.43; P = .25). CONCLUSIONS: RTLS doubled the potential pertussis exposures beyond EMR-based contact identification. Thus, RTLS may be a valuable addition to the practice of contact tracing and infectious disease monitoring.