Stress and Coping in Emergency Nurses Following Trauma Patient Care: A Qualitative Grounded Theory Approach.

BACKGROUND: Experiencing symptoms of traumatic stress may be the cost of caring for trauma patients. Emergency nurses caring for trauma patients are at risk for traumatic stress reactions. OBJECTIVE: This study explored the stress and coping behaviors experienced by emergency nurses who provide trauma care. METHODS: Focus groups were held at three urban trauma centers in the Midwestern United States: a Level I pediatric trauma center, a Level I adult trauma center, and a Level III adult trauma center. Data were collected between December 2009 and March 2010. Data analysis was guided by the principles of grounded theory. Line-by-line coding and constant comparative analysis techniques were used to identify recurring constructs. RESULTS: A total of 48 emergency nurses participated. Recurring constructs emerged in the data analysis and coding, revealing four major themes: care of the trauma patient, professional practice, personal life, and support. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse job engagement, burnout, and professional and personal relationships are influenced by trauma patient care. The study's resulting themes of care of the trauma patient, professional practice, personal life, and support resulted in the development of the "trauma nursing is a continual experience theory" that can be used as a framework to address these effects. Intentional support and timely interventions based on this new theory can help mitigate the effects of traumatic stress experienced by trauma nurses.

CE: Breaking Through the Bottleneck: Acuity Adaptability in Noncritical Trauma Care.

BACKGROUND: Achieving efficient throughput of patients is a challenge faced by many hospital systems. Factors that can impede efficient throughput include increased ED use, high surgical volumes, lack of available beds, and the complexities of coordinating multiple patient transfers in response to changing care needs. Traditionally, many hospital inpatient units operate via a fixed acuity model, relying on multiple intrahospital transfers to move patients along the care continuum. In contrast, the acuity-adaptable model allows care to occur in the same room despite fluctuations in clinical condition, removing the need for transfer. This model has been shown to be a safe and cost-effective approach to improving throughput in populations with predictable courses of hospitalization, but has been minimally evaluated in other populations, such as patients hospitalized for traumatic injury. PURPOSE: This quality improvement project aimed to evaluate implementation of an acuity-adaptable model on a 20-bed noncritical trauma unit. Specifically, we sought to examine and compare the pre- and postimplementation metrics for throughput efficiency, resource utilization, and nursing quality indicators; and to determine the model's impact on patient transfers for changes in level of care. METHODS: This was a retrospective, comparative analysis of 1,371 noncritical trauma patients admitted to a level 1 trauma center before and after the implementation of an acuity-adaptable model. Outcomes of interest included throughput efficiency, resource utilization, and quality of nursing care. Inferential statistics were used to compare patients pre- and postimplementation, and logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the impact of the acuity-adaptable model on patient transfers. RESULTS: Postimplementation, the median ED boarding time was reduced by 6.2 hours, patients more often remained in their assigned room following a change in level of care, more progressive care patient days occurred, fall and hospital-acquired pressure injury index rates decreased respectively by 0.9 and 0.3 occurrences per 1,000 patient days, and patients were more often discharged to home. Logistic regression analyses revealed that under the new model, patients were more than nine times more likely to remain in the same room for care after a change in acuity and 81.6% less likely to change rooms after a change in acuity. An increase of over $11,000 in average daily bed charges occurred postimplementation as a result of increased progressive care-level bed capacity. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of an acuity-adaptable model on a dedicated noncritical trauma unit improved throughput efficiency and resource utilization without sacrificing quality of care. As hospitals continue to face increasing demand for services as well as numerous barriers to meeting such demand, leaders remain challenged to find innovative ways to optimize operational efficiency and resource utilization while ensuring delivery of high-quality care. The findings of this study demonstrate the value of the acuity-adaptable model in achieving these goals in a noncritical trauma care population.

Original Research: Breaking Through the Bottleneck: Acuity Adaptability in Noncritical Trauma Care.

BACKGROUND: Achieving efficient throughput of patients is a challenge faced by many hospital systems. Factors that can impede efficient throughput include increased ED use, high surgical volumes, lack of available beds, and the complexities of coordinating multiple patient transfers in response to changing care needs. Traditionally, many hospital inpatient units operate via a fixed acuity model, relying on multiple intrahospital transfers to move patients along the care continuum. In contrast, the acuity-adaptable model allows care to occur in the same room despite fluctuations in clinical condition, removing the need for transfer. This model has been shown to be a safe and cost-effective approach to improving throughput in populations with predictable courses of hospitalization, but has been minimally evaluated in other populations, such as patients hospitalized for traumatic injury. PURPOSE: This quality improvement project aimed to evaluate implementation of an acuity-adaptable model on a 20-bed noncritical trauma unit. Specifically, we sought to examine and compare the pre- and postimplementation metrics for throughput efficiency, resource utilization, and nursing quality indicators; and to determine the model's impact on patient transfers for changes in level of care. METHODS: This was a retrospective, comparative analysis of 1,371 noncritical trauma patients admitted to a level 1 trauma center before and after the implementation of an acuity-adaptable model. Outcomes of interest included throughput efficiency, resource utilization, and quality of nursing care. Inferential statistics were used to compare patients pre- and postimplementation, and logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the impact of the acuity-adaptable model on patient transfers. RESULTS: Postimplementation, the median ED boarding time was reduced by 6.2 hours, patients more often remained in their assigned room following a change in level of care, more progressive care patient days occurred, fall and hospital-acquired pressure injury index rates decreased respectively by 0.9 and 0.3 occurrences per 1,000 patient days, and patients were more often discharged to home. Logistic regression analyses revealed that under the new model, patients were more than nine times more likely to remain in the same room for care after a change in acuity and 81.6% less likely to change rooms after a change in acuity. An increase of over $11,000 in average daily bed charges occurred postimplementation as a result of increased progressive care-level bed capacity. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of an acuity-adaptable model on a dedicated noncritical trauma unit improved throughput efficiency and resource utilization without sacrificing quality of care. As hospitals continue to face increasing demand for services as well as numerous barriers to meeting such demand, leaders remain challenged to find innovative ways to optimize operational efficiency and resource utilization while ensuring delivery of high-quality care. The findings of this study demonstrate the value of the acuity-adaptable model in achieving these goals in a noncritical trauma care population.

Development, implementation and outcomes of a quality assurance system for the provision of continuous renal replacement therapy in the intensive care unit.

Critically ill patients with requirement of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) represent a growing intensive care unit (ICU) population. Optimal CRRT delivery demands continuous communication between stakeholders, iterative adjustment of therapy, and quality assurance systems. This Quality Improvement (QI) study reports the development, implementation and outcomes of a quality assurance system to support the provision of CRRT in the ICU. This study was carried out at the University of Kentucky Medical Center between September 2016 and June 2019. We implemented a quality assurance system using a step-wise approach based on the (a) assembly of a multidisciplinary team, (b) standardization of the CRRT protocol, (c) creation of electronic CRRT flowsheets, (d) selection, monitoring and reporting of quality metrics of CRRT deliverables, and (e) enhancement of education. We examined 34-month data comprising 1185 adult patients on CRRT (~ 7420 patient-days of CRRT) and tracked selected QI outcomes/metrics of CRRT delivery. As a result of the QI interventions, we increased the number of multidisciplinary experts in the CRRT team and ensured a continuum of education to health care professionals. We maximized to 100% the use of continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration and doubled the percentage of patients using regional citrate anticoagulation. The delivered CRRT effluent dose (~ 30 ml/kg/h) and the delivered/prescribed effluent dose ratio (~ 0.89) remained stable within the study period. The average filter life increased from 26 to 31 h (p = 0.020), reducing the mean utilization of filters per patient from 3.56 to 2.67 (p = 0.054) despite similar CRRT duration and mortality rates. The number of CRRT access alarms per treatment day was reduced by 43%. The improvement in filter utilization translated into ~ 20,000 USD gross savings in filter cost per 100-patient receiving CRRT. We satisfactorily developed and implemented a quality assurance system for the provision of CRRT in the ICU that enabled sustainable tracking of CRRT deliverables and reduced filter resource utilization at our institution.

A Psychometric Analysis of CIWA-Ar in Acutely Ill and Injured Hospitalized Patients.

Alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) manifests after alcohol-dependent individuals suddenly cease alcohol consumption. Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment-Alcohol, revised (CIWA-Ar) is a widely used tool to assess and guide treatment of AWS. CIWA-Ar was developed in voluntarily detoxification centers, and the reliability and validity of CIWA-Ar have been minimally evaluated in hospitalized patients. We performed a retrospective chart review of 479 cases of screening and treatment of AWS using CIWA-Ar, of which 118 were admitted to a trauma/orthopedic (T/O) service and 361 to an internal medicine (IM) service. Exploratory factor analyses with varimax rotation were applied for each population, and reliability testing was performed on the determined subscales. Exploratory factor analyses yielded 2 unique structures, each explaining 56% of the variance of CIWA-Ar. The IM group had a 3-factor structure with the Physical Disturbances (23%), Anxiety (19%), and Confusion (14%) subscales. The T/O group had a 2-factor structure with the Neurological Disturbances (36%) and Physical Disturbances (20%) subscales. Overall, Cronbach's alphas were acceptable (0.74 and 0.82 for IM and T/O, respectively); however, Cronbach's alphas for the IM subscales were 0.66 and 0.69 for physical disturbances and anxiety, respectively. Cronbach's alpha for the Confusion subscale was not calculated because only 1 scale item loaded. The subscales of the T/O factor structure yielded Cronbach's alphas of 0.81 for neurological disturbances and 0.62 for physical disturbances. Our analyses did not support the reliability or validity of CIWA-Ar in acutely ill or injured patients, warranting further investigation and tool development for AWS management in the hospital setting.

Use of Plasma-Based Trauma Transfusion Protocols at Level IV Trauma Centers.

Early initiation of a high ratio massive transfusion can lower trauma patient mortality by 80%. Long transport times from rural Level IV trauma centers therefore require that damage control resuscitation begin before patient transfer. This study evaluates the current use of fresh frozen plasma (FFP) at Level IV trauma centers and the feasibility of implementing trauma transfusion protocols at these centers. Demographic and clinical data were collected for trauma patients at all state Level IV trauma centers who would have met criteria for massive transfusion protocol (MTP) activation based on the Assessment of Blood Consumption (ABC) score. All state Level IV trauma centers were also surveyed to determine availability of blood bank plasma resources. A total of 760 adult trauma patients presented to a Level IV trauma center during the study period. Three hundred sixty-eight patients (48.4%) were transferred to a higher level of care. Because FAST (Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma) results were not available in the state registry data, we included all blunt trauma patients with an ABC score of 1 as "potential ABC-positive patients." Forty-two (5.5%) patients were potentially ABC positive. Fifteen of 22 Level IV centers responded to our survey. Seventy-three percent of respondents have FFP available. Mean time to FFP availability was 63.1 min. Median total length of stay from registration to emergency department discharge for potentially ABC-positive patients was 2 hr. Because most Level IV trauma centers have FFP and thaw times are such that administration would not delay transport to a higher level of care, we recommend implementation of MTPs at Level IV trauma centers to reduce hemorrhage-associated mortality.

Implementation and Evaluation of a Team Simulation Training Program.

BACKGROUND: Care of the trauma patient requires a well-coordinated intensive effort during the golden hour to optimize survival. PURPOSE: We hypothesized that this program would improve knowledge, satisfaction, self-confidence, and simulated team performance. METHODS: A pre-, post-test design with N = 7 BSN nurses, 21 years of age, less than 2 years of intensive care unit and nursing experience. SETTING: Trauma intensive care unit, single-center academic Level 1 trauma center. RESULTS: Improvement was shown in perception of team structure (paired t test 13.71-12.57; p = .0001) and communication (paired t test 14.85-12.14; p = .009). Improvement was shown in observed situation monitoring (paired t test 17.42-25.28; p = .000), mutual support (paired t test 12.57-18.57; p = .000), and communication (paired t test 15.42-25.00; p = .001). A decrease was shown in attitudes of mutual support (paired t test 25.85-19.71; p = .04) and communication (paired t test 26.14-23.00; p = .001). Mean satisfaction scores were 21.5 of a possible 25 points. Mean self-confidence scores were 38.83 out of a possible 40 points. DISCUSSION: Simulation-based team training improved teamwork attitudes, perceptions, and performance. Team communication demonstrated significant improvement in 2 of the 3 instruments. Most participants agreed or strongly agreed that they were satisfied with simulation and had gained self-confidence.

Maintaining an open trauma intensive care unit bed for rapid admission can be cost-effective.

BACKGROUND: In 2012, we implemented a ready open trauma intensive care unit (TICU) bed process. Our hypothesis was that this process would decrease emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS) in a cost-effective manner without worsening clinical outcomes. METHODS: We developed a charge nurse without a patient assignment to facilitate this open bed. We also provided team training for early ICU resuscitation. All Level 1 activations admitted directly to the TICU before and after the implementation were examined. Patients taken directly to the operating room from the ED, deaths within 24 hours of admission, and patients with nonsurvivable head injuries were excluded. Cost-effectiveness of the position was examined. RESULTS: Age (mean [SD], 45.78 [18.71] years), sex (74.7% male), and Injury Severity Score (ISS) (mean [SD], 17.27 [9.26]) were not significantly different. Median ED LOS for the postimplementation group decreased from 230 minutes to 66 minutes (p < 0.001). Median ICU LOS (from 3.29 to 2.98 days, p = 0.13) and total median hospital LOS (from 10.71 to 7.98 days, p = 0.06) decreased but were not statistically significant. Controlling for age, ISS, sex, and mechanism of injury the postimplementation group had a 29% reduction in ICU LOS (2.12 days), a 28% reduction in hospital LOS (4.34), and a 54% reduction in ED LOS (154 minutes). The LOS decreased despite a small increase in ISS (from 15.89 to 18.37). Observed/expected mortality did not differ between the groups, preimplementation/postimplementation of 0.87 and 0.92. Nursing productivity increased one nurse after implementation at a cost of $624 per day. The ICU LOS decrease of 1.6 days at a rate of $1,144 average ICU daily cost of room and board totaled $1,830 per patient. The decreased ICU LOS dollars minus the increase nurse pay resulted in an overall savings of $1,206 per patient. CONCLUSION: Rapid access to the TICU made possible by the charge nurse without a direct assignment and team training has a potential cost savings without adversely affecting patient outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Cost analysis, level III.

Imaging may delay transfer of rural trauma victims: a survey of referring physicians.

BACKGROUND: Delayed transfer to a trauma center due to unnecessary imaging results in suboptimal patient outcome and increases healthcare costs. Unnecessary imaging may result from beliefs regarding trauma center requirements and legal concerns. We hypothesized that referring physicians consider factors other than clinical criteria when deciding to order imaging studies before transfer of trauma patients. METHODS: A mail survey of 218 referring physicians to a level I trauma center elicited factors affecting decision to obtain imaging studies before transfer. Graded answers to six questions were obtained and demographics of the physician respondent. Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: One hundred forty-nine of 218 surveys were returned (68.3%). One-third (33.1%) of respondents obtain imaging because of perceived expectations of the receiving trauma center, independent of patient acuity. Twenty percent incorrectly think that the law prohibits transfer before patients are stabilized. Twenty-eight percent obtain imaging because of liability concerns, even if that imaging delays transfer. Overall, 45% obtain imaging for either perceived requirement or liability concern. Non-advanced trauma life support (ATLS)-certified physicians are more likely to use all available resources before transfer than ATLS-certified physicians. CONCLUSIONS: Factors other than patient care dictate imaging acquisition in almost half of those surveyed. Misperception of expectations, misunderstanding of legal imperatives, and liability concerns all delay transport of the injured. ATLS-certified individuals use imaging more appropriately, thus, promoting more timely transfer. State-wide protocols, education, and liability reform may reduce transport delays.