Emergency clinicians' use of adult and paediatric sepsis pathways: An implementation redesign using the behaviour change wheel.

AIMS: To identify facilitators and barriers and tailor implementation strategies to optimize emergency clinician's use of adult and paediatric sepsis pathways. DESIGN: A qualitative descriptive study using focus group methodology. METHODS: Twenty-two emergency nurses and ten emergency medical officers from four Australian EDs participated in eight virtual focus groups. Participants were asked about their experiences using the New South Wales Clinical Excellence Commission adult and paediatric sepsis pathways using a semi-structured interview template. Facilitators and barriers to use of the sepsis pathways were categorized using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Tailored interventions were selected to address facilitators and barriers, and a re-implementation plan was devised guided by the Behaviour Change Wheel. RESULTS: Thirty-two facilitators and 58 barriers were identified corresponding to 11 Theoretical Domains Framework domains. Tailored strategies were selected to optimize emergency clinicians' use of the sepsis pathways including refinement of existing education and training programmes, modifications to the electronic medical record system, introduction of an audit and feedback system, staffing strategies and additional resources. CONCLUSION: The implementation of sepsis pathways in the Emergency Department setting is complex, impacted by a multitude of factors requiring tailored strategies to address facilitators and barriers and optimize uptake. IMPLICATIONS FOR PATIENT CARE: This study presents a theory-informed systematic approach to successfully implement and embed adult and paediatric sepsis pathways into clinical practice in the Emergency Department. IMPACT: Optimizing uptake of sepsis pathways has the potential to improve sepsis recognition and management, subsequently improving the outcome of patients with sepsis. REPORTING METHOD: The Consolidated Criteria for REporting Qualitative research guided the preparation of this report. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Nil.

Implementation evaluation of a rapid response system in a regional emergency department: a dual-methods study using the behaviour change wheel.

BACKGROUND: Failure to recognise and respond to clinical deterioration is a major cause of high mortality events in emergency department (ED) patients. Whilst there is substantial evidence that rapid response teams reduce hospital mortality, unplanned intensive care admissions, and cardiac arrests on in-patient settings, the use of rapid response teams in the ED is variable with poor integration of care between emergency and specialty/intensive care teams. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate uptake and impact of a rapid response system on recognising and responding to deteriorating patients in the ED and identify implementation factors and strategies to optimise future implementation success. METHODS: A dual-methods design was used to evaluate an ED Clinical Emergency Response System (EDCERS) protocol implemented at a regional Australian ED in June 2019. A documentation audit was conducted on patients eligible for the EDCERS during the first 3 months of implementation. Quantitative data from documentation audit were used to measure uptake and impact of the protocol on escalation and response to patient deterioration. Facilitators and barriers to the EDCERS uptake were identified via key stakeholder engagement and consultation. An implementation plan was developed using the Behaviour Change Wheel for future implementation. RESULTS: The EDCERS was activated in 42 (53.1%) of 79 eligible patients. The specialty care team were more likely to respond when the EDCERS was activated than when there was no activation ([n = 40, 50.6%] v [n = 26, 32.9%], p = 0.01). Six facilitators and nine barriers to protocol uptake were identified. Twenty behaviour change techniques were selected and informed the development of a theory-informed implementation plan. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the EDCERS protocol resulted in high response rates from specialty and intensive care staff. However, overall uptake of the protocol by emergency staff was poor. This study highlights the importance of understanding facilitators and barriers to uptake prior to implementing a new intervention.

Impact of an emergency department rapid response system on inpatient clinical deterioration: A controlled pre-post study.

AIM: To determine the impact implementation of Emergency Department Clinical Emergency Response System (EDCERS) on inpatient deterioration events and identify contributing causal factors. METHODS: EDCERS was implemented in an Australian regional hospital, integrating a single parameter track and trigger criteria for escalation of care, and emergency, specialty and critical care clinician response to patient deterioration. In this controlled pre-post study, electronic medical records of patients who experienced a deterioration event (rapid response call, cardiac arrest or unplanned intensive care admission) on the ward within 72 h of admission from the emergency department (ED) were reviewed. Causal factors contributing to the deteriorating event were assessed using a validated human factors framework. RESULTS: Implementation of EDCERS reduced the number of inpatient deterioration events within 72 h of emergency admission with failure or delayed response to ED patient deterioration as a causal factor. There was no change in the overall rate of inpatient deterioration events. CONCLUSION: This study supports wider implementation of rapid response systems in the ED to improve management of deteriorating patients. Tailored implementation strategies should be used to achieve successful and sustainable uptake of ED rapid response systems and improve outcomes in deteriorating patients.

Implementation strategy fidelity evaluation for a multidisciplinary Chest Injury Protocol (ChIP).

BACKGROUND: Blunt chest wall injuries can lead to complications, especially without early intervention. A blunt Chest Injury Protocol (ChIP) was developed to help improve the consistency of evidence-based care following admission to the emergency department. Implementation strategy fidelity is the extent to which the strategies of implementation are delivered in line with the intended plan. The aim of this study was to assess fidelity to the strategies of the implementation plan developed for ChIP. METHODS: A retrospective evaluation of strategies used for implementation was performed, specifically the behaviour change techniques (BCTs). BCTs were used as part of an implementation plan derived based on the Behaviour Change Wheel from results from a staff survey at two hospitals. Levels of implementation or adaptation for BCTs were scored by implementers as follows: 'Were the behaviour change interventions implemented?' (0 = 'not implemented', 1 = partially implemented, and 2 = fully implemented); 'Were adaptations made to the implementation plan?', scored 1 (many changes from plan) to 4 (just as planned). Free text explanation to their responses was also collected with supporting evidence and documentation (such as emails, implementation checklists, audit reports, and incident reports). RESULTS: There was high overall fidelity of 97.6% for BCTs partially or fully implemented. More than three quarters (32/42, 76.2%) of the BCTs were fully implemented with an additional 9/42 (21.4%) partially implemented. BCTs that were not fully implemented were social support, feedback on behaviour, feedback on outcomes of behaviour, adding objects to the environment, and restructuring the environment. The modes of delivery with poorer implementation or increased adaptations were clinical champions and audit/feedback. CONCLUSIONS: This study describes the evaluation of implementation strategy fidelity in the acute care context. The systematic use and application of the behaviour change wheel was used to develop an implementation plan and was associated with high implementation strategy fidelity. A fidelity checklist developed during the implementation process may help implementers assess fidelity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registered on ANZCTR. Registration number ACTRN12618001548224 , date approved 17/09/2018.

Does electronic medical record redesign increase screening of risk for pressure injury, falls and substance use in the Emergency Department? An implementation evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Following the provision of urgent care, screening for risks known to impact patient outcomes is an extension of safe emergency nursing care, in particular for falls, pressure injury and substance use. Screening is a process that primarily aims to identify people at increased risk for specific complications. This study aimed to describe and evaluate the implementation of a consolidated electronic checklist on the screening completion rates for falls, pressure injury and substance use in a regional health district. METHODS: This pre-post study used emergency data from four Emergency Departments (EDs) in southern NSW, Australia between November 2016 and February 2019. Patient characteristics, triage category, discharge diagnosis, arrival date and time, screening completion date and time and treatment location were extracted. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the characteristics of the presentations. Z test with adjusted p-values using Bonferroni Correction method was used to compare the characteristics of the presentations and the rates of screening completion. The Theoretical Domains Framework was used to identify any deficits in the implementation. RESULTS: There were 33,561 patients in the pre and 35,807 in the post group. There were no differences in patient characteristics between the two groups. The mean emergency department (ED) length of stay was unchanged (490.5min pre vs 489.9min post). The proportion of patients who had all three screens completed increased from 1.3% to 5.5% (p<0.001). Pressure injury risk screening increased from 46.6% (pre) to 53.1% (post) (p<0.001) as did substance use screening (1.7% vs 12.4%, p<0.001). Screening was strongly associated to which hospital the patient was admitted, their age and ED length of stay. Of the 51 mapped intervention functions, 20 (39%) were used in the implementation. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of a consolidated electronic checklist for use by emergency nurses to complete fall, pressure injury and substance use screening resulted in an overall increase in risk screening. However screening rates remained poor. Implementation that considers the capability, opportunity and motivation of those that need to alter their behaviour would likely improve the overall compliance.

Translation of evidence into policy to improve clinical practice: the development of an emergency department rapid response system.

BACKGROUND: Undetected clinical deterioration is a major cause of high mortality events in Emergency Department (ED) patients. Yet, there is no known model to guide the recognition and response to clinical deterioration in the ED, integrating internal and external resources. METHODS: An integrative review was firstly conducted to identify the critical components of recognising and responding to clinical deterioration in the ED. Components identified from the review were analysed by clinical experts and informed the development of an ED Clinical Emergency Response System (EDCERS). RESULTS: Twenty four eligible studies were included in the review. Eight core components were identified: 1) vital sign monitoring; 2) track and trigger system; 3) communication plan; 4) response time; 5) emergency nurse response; 6) emergency physician response; 7) critical care team response; and 8) specialty team response. These components informed the development of the EDCERS protocol, integrating responses from staff internal and external to the ED. CONCLUSIONS: EDCERS was based on the best available evidence and considered the cultural context of care. Future research is needed to determine the useability and impact of EDCERS on patient and health outcomes.