Improving Daily Patient Goal-Setting and Team Communication: The Liber8 Glass Door Project.

OBJECTIVES: To develop and implement a tool to improve daily patient goal setting, team collaboration and communication. DESIGN: Quality improvement implementation project. SETTING: Tertiary-level PICU. PATIENTS: Inpatient children less than 18 years old requiring ICU level care. INTERVENTION: A "Glass Door" daily goals communication tool located in the door front of each patient room. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We used Pronovost's 4 E's model to implement the Glass Door. Primary outcomes were uptake of goal setting, healthcare team discussion rate around goals, rounding efficiency, acceptability and sustainability of the Glass Door. The total implementation duration from engagement to evaluation of sustainability was 24 months. Goal setting increased significantly from 22.9% to 90.7% ( p < 0.01) patient-days using the Glass Door compared to a paper-based daily goals checklist (DGC). One-year post implementation, the uptake was sustained at 93.1% ( p = 0.04). Rounding time decreased from a median of 11.7 minutes (95% CI, 10.9-12.4 min) to 7.5 minutes (95% CI, 6.9-7.9 min) per patient post-implementation ( p < 0.01). Goal discussions on ward rounds increased overall from 40.1% to 58.5% ( p < 0.01). Ninety-one percent of team members perceive that the Glass Door improves communication for patient care, and 80% preferred the Glass Door to the DGC for communicating patient goals with other team members. Sixty-six percent of family members found the Glass Door helpful in understanding the daily plan and 83% found it helpful in ensuring thorough discussion among the PICU team. CONCLUSIONS: The Glass Door is a highly visible tool that can improve patient goal setting and collaborative team discussion with good uptake and acceptability among healthcare team members and patient families.

Impressions of Early Mobilization of Critically Ill Children-Clinician, Patient, and Family Perspectives.

OBJECTIVES: To understand patient, family caregiver, and clinician impressions of early mobilization, the perceived barriers and facilitators to its implementation, and the use of in-bed cycling as a method of mobilization. DESIGN: A qualitative study, conducted as part of the Early Exercise in Critically ill Youth and Children, a preliminary Evaluation (wEECYCLE) Pilot randomized controlled trial. SETTING: McMaster Children's Hospital PICU, Hamilton, ON, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Clinicians (i.e., physicians, nurses, and physiotherapists), family caregivers, and capable patients age greater than or equal to 8 years old who were enrolled in a clinical trial of early mobilization in critically ill children (wEECYCLE). INTERVENTION: Semistructured, face-to-face interviews using a customized interview guide for clinicians, caregivers, and patients respectively, conducted after exposure to the early mobilization intervention. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-seven participants were interviewed (19 family caregivers, four patients, and 14 clinicians). Family caregivers and clinicians described similar interrelated themes representing barriers to mobilization, namely low prioritization of mobilization by the medical team, safety concerns, the lack of physiotherapy resources, and low patient motivation. Key facilitators were family trust in the healthcare team, team engagement, an a priori belief that physical activity is important, and participation in research. Increased familiarity and specific features such as the virtual reality component and ability to execute passive and or active mobilization helped to engage critically ill children in in-bed cycling. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians, patients, and families were highly supportive of mobilization in critically ill children; however, concerns were identified with respect to how and when to execute this practice. Understanding key stakeholder perspectives enables the development of strategies to facilitate the implementation of early mobilization and in-bed cycling, not just in the context of a clinical trial but also within the culture of practice in a PICU.

Early Exercise in Critically Ill Youth and Children, a Preliminary Evaluation: The wEECYCLE Pilot Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the feasibility of conducting a full trial evaluating the efficacy of early mobilization using in-bed cycling as an adjunct to physiotherapy, on functional outcomes in critically ill children. DESIGN: Single center, pilot, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Twelve-bed tertiary care, medical-surgical PICU at McMaster Children's Hospital, Hamilton, ON, Canada. PATIENTS: Children 3-17 years old who were limited to bed-rest with an expected PICU stay of at least 48 hours. Patients were excluded if they were at their baseline level of function, already mobilizing out of bed or expected to do so within 24 hours. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to early mobilization using in-bed cycling in addition to usual care physiotherapy (cycling arm) or to usual care physiotherapy alone (control). Usual care was according to institutional practice guidelines. The primary outcome was feasibility and safety. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Thirty patients were enrolled (20 to the cycling and 10 to control) over a 12-month period, at a 93.7% consent rate. The median (interquartile range) time from PICU admission to mobilization was 1.5 days (1-3) in the cycling arm and 2.5 days (2-7) in the control arm. Total duration of mobilization therapy in PICU was 210 (152-380) and 136 minutes (42-314 min) in cycling and control arms, respectively. Total number of PICU days mobilized was 5.0 (3-6) with cycling and 2.5 (2-4.8) with usual care. No adverse events occurred in either arm. The main threat to feasibility of mobilization was the availability of physiotherapists or research personnel. CONCLUSIONS: Early mobilization is safe and feasible in the PICU. In-bed cycling may facilitate greater duration and intensity of mobilization, in critically ill children. A full-scale randomized controlled trial is warranted to evaluate the efficacy of this intervention on PICU-acquired morbidities and functional outcomes in this population.