Continuous Physiological Monitoring Improves Patient Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: General patient acuity is increasing in the United States, with more patients having multiple comorbidities and acute-on-chronic conditions. Hospitalizations may also be complicated by serious adverse events, often unrelated to the admitting medical diagnosis. In our facility, the late detection of patient deterioration on general medical units often resulted in increased length of stay (LOS) in the ICU and poor patient outcomes. PURPOSE: The purpose of this project was to improve patient surveillance and better identify early signs of patient deterioration through the use of continuous vital sign monitoring technology. METHODS: To improve detection of patient deterioration, a nurse-led monitoring and response system was developed using a wearable, wireless device for continuous vital sign surveillance. The patient data the device provided was used with early warning scores and sepsis screening protocols for timely goal-directed interventions. RESULTS: Ninety-seven percent of patient deterioration events were recognized and treated as a result of this continuous monitoring and response system. Rapid response team activations decreased by 53% between baseline and the intervention period. LOS among patients transferred to the ICU decreased from 2.82 to 2.19 days. Nurse satisfaction with use of the continuous monitoring device was positive, with 74% of nurses surveyed reporting that information provided by the device enhanced decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: New technology for patient surveillance, in this case a nurse-led monitoring and response system, can be successfully integrated into general care practice. Use of the nurse-led response system helped nurses recognize early signs of deterioration and continue meaningful patient interactions.

Addressing the Challenge of COVID-19: One Health Care Site's Leadership Response to the Pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic created an extremely disruptive challenge for health care leaders that required a rapid, dynamic, and innovative response. The purpose of this manuscript is to share the leadership actions and decisions at Mayo Clinic in Florida during the first 6 months of the pandemic (February to July 2020). We note 4 strategies that contributed to an effective response: (1) leverage experience with disaster preparedness and mobilize regional and national networks; (2) use surge models to anticipate and to address supply chain issues as well as practical and financial effects of the pandemic; (3) adapt creatively to establish new safety and procedural protocols in various areas for various populations; and (4) communicate timely information effectively and be the common source of truth. Mayo Clinic in Florida was able to address the surges of patients with COVID-19, to provide ongoing tertiary care, and to restore function within the first 6 months with new, strengthened practices and protocols.

Using a Potentially Aggressive/Violent Patient Huddle to Improve Health Care Safety.

BACKGROUND: Unexpected situations of workplace violence are occurring in the United States at increasing rates in health care environments, warranting increased attention to processes supporting safety for health care workers. At a large, academic hospital, two patient safety incidents had occurred in a two-year period in which a patient had become violent at the time of admission from the emergency department (ED) to the medical unit. METHODS: A multidisciplinary quality improvement (QI) team was formed to address the risk of violent patient events. Using two iterative Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles, the QI team designed and tested a huddle handoff communication tool, the Potentially Aggressive/Violent Huddle Form. An ED nurse would initiate the huddle process by informing the admitting unit that a patient at risk for violence was being admitted. The admitting care team would then call the ED team so that both teams participated in the handoff call together. The huddle process occurred for 21 transfers in the first PDSA cycle and for 18 transfers in the second. RESULTS: RNs from the ED and the six medical units reported feeling safe during the transfer process 100% of the time during both tests of change PDSAs (vs. 54.7% at baseline). In the ED, from the first test of change to the second test of change, satisfaction with the process improved from 53.3% to 75.0%. CONCLUSION: The huddle handoff communication tool and other methods to facilitate the transfer of potentially violent patients have the potential to decrease the number and severity of violent incidents in the health care workplace.