Informatics and interaction: Applying human factors principles to optimize the design of clinical decision support for sepsis.

In caring for patients with sepsis, the current structure of electronic health record systems allows clinical providers access to raw patient data without imputation of its significance. There are a wide range of sepsis alerts in clinical care that act as clinical decision support tools to assist in early recognition of sepsis; however, there are serious shortcomings in existing health information technology for alerting providers in a meaningful way. Little work has been done to evaluate and assess existing alerts using implementation and process outcomes associated with health information technology displays, specifically evaluating clinician preference and performance. We developed graphical model displays of two popular sepsis scoring systems, quick Sepsis Related Organ Failure Assessment and Predisposition, Infection, Response, Organ Failure, using human factors principles grounded in user-centered and interaction design. Models will be evaluated in a larger research effort to optimize alert design to improve the collective awareness of high-risk populations and develop a relevant point-of-care clinical decision support system for sepsis.

Patient Satisfaction with Care After Coronary Revascularization.

OBJECTIVE: Bridging the Divides (Bridges), a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-funded program, developed a post-hospitalization care management infrastructure integrating information technology-enabled informatics with patient care for ischemic heart disease patients. The objective of this study was to assess patient satisfaction with the Bridges program and determine the patient characteristics associated with higher satisfaction. METHODS: All adult English-speaking patients who underwent a percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting, or catheterization plus acute myocardial infarction and agreed to participate in the Bridges program were eligible. A survey instrument was administered to address patient satisfaction of care received, aspects of care that patients appreciated, and challenges faced. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and primary analyses included comparisons of overall patient satisfaction after discharge between procedure type, and according to age, sex, race, Elixhauser comorbidity count, and length of stay. RESULTS: Four hundred and sixty-seven (46%) had complete or partial response rates. There was a statistically significant difference in the overall satisfaction among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting, or catheterization plus acute myocardial infarction (p = 0.023). There were significant procedure by sex (p = 0.052) and procedure by age (p = 0.039) interactions. There were no statistically significant differences in overall satisfaction according to age, sex, race, comorbidity count, or length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified several important components related to patient satisfaction for patients with ischemic heart disease. Results found that patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting were reportedly "very satisfied" when compared with patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and catheterization plus acute myocardial infarction, as well as significant age and sex interactions between procedures.

Determining the magnitude of surveillance bias in the assessment of lower extremity deep venous thrombosis: A prospective observational study of two centers.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in trauma. Controversy exists regarding the use of lower extremity duplex ultrasound screening and surveillance (LEDUS). Advocates cite earlier diagnosis and treatment of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) to prevent clot propagation and pulmonary embolism (PE). Opponents argue that LEDUS identifies more DVT (surveillance bias) but does not reduce the incidence of PE. We sought to determine the magnitude of surveillance bias associated with LEDUS and test the hypothesis that LEDUS does not decrease the incidence of PE after injury. METHODS: We compared data from two Level 1 trauma centers: Scripps Mercy Hospital, which used serial LEDUS, and Christiana Care Health System, which used LEDUS only for symptomatic patients. Beginning in 2013, both centers prospectively collected data on demographics, injury severity, and VTE risk for patients admitted for more than 48 hours. Both centers used mechanical and pharmacologic prophylaxis based on VTE risk assessment. RESULTS: Scripps Mercy treated 772 patients and Christiana Care treated 454 patients with similar injury severity and VTE risk. The incidence of PE was 0.4% at both centers. The odds of a DVT diagnosis were 5.3 times higher (odds ratio, 5.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.5-12.9; p < 0.0001) for patients admitted to Scripps Mercy than for patients admitted to Christiana Care. Of the 80 patients who developed DVT, PE, or both, 99% received prophylaxis before the event. Among those who received pharmacologic prophylaxis, the VTE rates between the two centers were not statistically significantly different (Scripps Mercy, 11% vs. Christiana Care, 3%; p = 0.06). CONCLUSION: The odds of a diagnosis of DVT are increased significantly when a program of LEDUS is used in trauma patients. Neither pharmacologic prophylaxis nor mechanical prophylaxis is completely effective in preventing VTE in trauma patients. VTE should not be considered a "never event" in this cohort. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic/epidemiologic study, level III; therapeutic study, level III.