Evaluating the Usability of an Emergency Department After Visit Summary: Staged Heuristic Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Heuristic evaluations, while commonly used, may inadequately capture the severity of identified usability issues. In the domain of health care, usability issues can pose different levels of risk to patients. Incorporating diverse expertise (eg, clinical and patient) in the heuristic evaluation process can help assess and address potential negative impacts on patient safety that may otherwise go unnoticed. One document that should be highly usable for patients-with the potential to prevent adverse outcomes-is the after visit summary (AVS). The AVS is the document given to a patient upon discharge from the emergency department (ED), which contains instructions on how to manage symptoms, medications, and follow-up care. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess a multistage method for integrating diverse expertise (ie, clinical, an older adult care partner, and health IT) with human factors engineering (HFE) expertise in the usability evaluation of the patient-facing ED AVS. METHODS: We conducted a three-staged heuristic evaluation of an ED AVS using heuristics developed for use in evaluating patient-facing documentation. In stage 1, HFE experts reviewed the AVS to identify usability issues. In stage 2, 6 experts of varying expertise (ie, emergency medicine physicians, ED nurses, geriatricians, transitional care nurses, and an older adult care partner) rated each previously identified usability issue on its potential impact on patient comprehension and patient safety. Finally, in stage 3, an IT expert reviewed each usability issue to identify the likelihood of successfully addressing the issue. RESULTS: In stage 1, we identified 60 usability issues that violated a total of 108 heuristics. In stage 2, 18 additional usability issues that violated 27 heuristics were identified by the study experts. Impact ratings ranged from all experts rating the issue as "no impact" to 5 out of 6 experts rating the issue as having a "large negative impact." On average, the older adult care partner representative rated usability issues as being more significant more of the time. In stage 3, 31 usability issues were rated by an IT professional as "impossible to address," 21 as "maybe," and 24 as "can be addressed." CONCLUSIONS: Integrating diverse expertise when evaluating usability is important when patient safety is at stake. The non-HFE experts, included in stage 2 of our evaluation, identified 23% (18/78) of all the usability issues and, depending on their expertise, rated those issues as having differing impacts on patient comprehension and safety. Our findings suggest that, to conduct a comprehensive heuristic evaluation, expertise from all the contexts in which the AVS is used must be considered. Combining those findings with ratings from an IT expert, usability issues can be strategically addressed through redesign. Thus, a 3-staged heuristic evaluation method offers a framework for integrating context-specific expertise efficiently, while providing practical insights to guide human-centered design.

Satisfaction of Older Patients With Emergency Department Care: Psychometric Properties and Construct Validity of the Consumer Emergency Care Satisfaction Scale.

BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction is an important indicator of quality of care, but its measurement remains challenging. The Consumer Emergency Care Satisfaction Scale (CECSS) was developed to measure patient satisfaction in the emergency department (ED). Although this is a valid and reliable tool, several aspects of the CECSS need to be improved, including the definition, dimension, and scoring of scales. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the construct validity of the CECSS and make suggestions on how to improve the tool to measure overall satisfaction with ED care. METHODS: We administered 2 surveys to older adults who presented with a fall to the ED and used electronic health record data to examine construct validity of the CECSS and ceiling effects. RESULTS: Using several criteria, we improved construct validity of the CECSS, reduced ceiling effects, and standardized scoring. CONCLUSION: We addressed several methodological issues with the CECSS and provided recommendations for improvement.

Older Adult Patients and Care Partners as Knowledge Brokers in Fragmented Health Care.

OBJECTIVE: To describe older adult patients' and care partners' knowledge broker roles during emergency department (ED) visits. BACKGROUND: Older adult patients are vulnerable to communication and coordination challenges during an ED visit, which can be exacerbated by the time and resource constrained ED environment. Yet, as a constant throughout the patient journey, patients and care partners can act as an information conduit, or knowledge broker, between fragmented care systems to attain high-quality, safe care. METHODS: Participants included 14 older adult patients (≥ 65 years old) and their care partners (e.g., spouse, adult child) who presented to the ED after having experienced a fall. Human factors researchers collected observation data from patients, care partners and clinician interactions during the patient's ED visit. We used an inductive content analysis to determine the role of patients and care partners as knowledge brokers. RESULTS: We found that patients and care partners act as knowledge brokers by providing information about diagnostic testing, medications, the patient's health history, and care accommodations at the disposition location. Patients and care partners filled the role of knowledge broker proactively (i.e. offer information) and reactively (i.e. are asked to provide information by clinicians or staff), within-ED work system and across work systems (e.g., between the ED and hospital), and in anticipation of future knowledge brokering. CONCLUSION: Patients and care partners, acting as knowledge brokers, often fill gaps in communication and participate in care coordination that assists in mitigating health care fragmentation.

Disparate perspectives: Exploring healthcare professionals' misaligned mental models of older adults' transitions of care between the emergency department and skilled nursing facility.

Care transitions that occur across healthcare system boundaries represent a unique challenge for maintaining high quality care and patient safety, as these systems are typically not aligned to perform the care transition process. We explored healthcare professionals' mental models of older adults' transitions between the emergency department (ED) and skilled nursing facility (SNF). We conducted a thematic analysis of interviews with ED and SNF healthcare professionals and identified three themes: 1) ED and SNF healthcare professionals had misaligned mental models regarding communication processes and tools used during care transitions, 2) ED and SNF healthcare professionals had misaligned mental models regarding healthcare system capability, and 3) Misalignments led to individual and organizational consequences. Overall, we found that SNF and ED healthcare professionals are part of the same process but have different perceptions of the process. Future work must take steps to redesign and realign these distinct work systems such that those involved conceptualize themselves as part of a joint process.

Physician Perceptions of Disposition Decision-making for Older Adults in the Emergency Department: A Preliminary Analysis.

Disposition decision-making in the emergency department (ED) is critical to patient safety and quality of care. Disposition decision-making has particularly important implications for older adults who comprise a significant portion of ED visits annually and are vulnerable to suboptimal outcomes throughout ED care transitions. We conducted a secondary inductive content analysis of interviews with ED physicians (N= 11) to explore their perceptions of who they involve in disposition decision-making and what information they use to make disposition decisions for older adults. ED physicians cited 7 roles (5 types of clinicians, patients and families) and 11 information types, both clinical (e.g. test/lab results) and non-clinical (e.g. family's preference). Our preliminary findings represent a key first step toward the development of interventions that promote patient safety and quality of care for older adults in the ED by supporting the cognitive and communicative aspects of disposition decision-making.