Interdisciplinary Development of an Improved Emergency Department Procedural Work Surface Through Iterative Design and Use Testing in Simulated and Clinical Environments.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: A stable and readily accessible work surface for bedside medical procedures represents a valuable tool for acute care providers. In emergency department (ED) settings, the design and implementation of traditional Mayo stands and related surface devices often limit their availability, portability, and usability, which can lead to suboptimal clinical practice conditions that may affect the safe and effective performance of medical procedures and delivery of patient care. We designed and built a novel, open-source, portable, bedside procedural surface through an iterative development process with use testing in simulated and live clinical environments. METHODS: The procedural surface development project was conducted between October 2014 and June 2016 at an academic referral hospital and its affiliated simulation facility. An interdisciplinary team of emergency physicians, mechanical engineers, medical students, and design students sought to construct a prototype bedside procedural surface out of off-the-shelf hardware during a collaborative university course on health care design. After determination of end-user needs and core design requirements, multiple prototypes were fabricated and iteratively modified, with early variants featuring undermattress stabilizing supports or ratcheting clamp mechanisms. Versions 1 through 4 underwent 2 hands-on usability-testing simulation sessions; version 5 was presented at a design critique held jointly by a panel of clinical and industrial design faculty for expert feedback. Responding to select feedback elements over several surface versions, investigators arrived at a near-final prototype design for fabrication and use testing in a live clinical setting. This experimental procedural surface (version 8) was constructed and then deployed for controlled usability testing against the standard Mayo stands in use at the study site ED. Clinical providers working in the ED who opted to participate in the study were provided with the prototype surface and just-in-time training on its use when performing bedside procedures. Subjects completed the validated 10-point System Usability Scale postshift for the surface that they had used. The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board. RESULTS: Multiple prototypes and recursive design revisions resulted in a fully functional, portable, and durable bedside procedural surface that featured a stainless steel tray and intuitive hook-and-lock mechanisms for attachment to ED stretcher bed rails. Forty-two control and 40 experimental group subjects participated and completed questionnaires. The median System Usability Scale score (out of 100; higher scores associated with better usability) was 72.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 51.3 to 86.3) for the Mayo stand; the experimental surface was scored at 93.8 (IQR 84.4 to 97.5 for a difference in medians of 17.5 (95% confidence interval 10 to 27.5). Subjects reported several usability challenges with the Mayo stand; the experimental surface was reviewed as easy to use, simple, and functional. In accordance with experimental live environment deployment, questionnaire responses, and end-user suggestions, the project team finalized the design specification for the experimental procedural surface for open dissemination. CONCLUSION: An iterative, interdisciplinary approach was used to generate, evaluate, revise, and finalize the design specification for a new procedural surface that met all core end-user requirements. The final surface design was evaluated favorably on a validated usability tool against Mayo stands when use tested in simulated and live clinical settings.

Inferior vena cava collapsibility detects fluid responsiveness among spontaneously breathing critically-ill patients.

PURPOSE: Measurement of inferior vena cava collapsibility (cIVC) by point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has been proposed as a viable, non-invasive means of assessing fluid responsiveness. We aimed to determine the ability of cIVC to identify patients who will respond to additional intravenous fluid (IVF) administration among spontaneously breathing critically-ill patients. METHODS: Prospective observational trial of spontaneously breathing critically-ill patients. cIVC was obtained 3cm caudal from the right atrium and IVC junction using POCUS. Fluid responsiveness was defined as a≥10% increase in cardiac index following a 500ml IVF bolus; measured using bioreactance (NICOM™, Cheetah Medical). cIVC was compared with fluid responsiveness and a cIVC optimal value was identified. RESULTS: Of the 124 participants, 49% were fluid responders. cIVC was able to detect fluid responsiveness: AUC=0.84 [0.76, 0.91]. The optimum cutoff point for cIVC was identified as 25% (LR+ 4.56 [2.72, 7.66], LR- 0.16 [0.08, 0.31]). A cIVC of 25% produced a lower misclassification rate (16.1%) for determining fluid responsiveness than the previous suggested cutoff values of 40% (34.7%). CONCLUSION: IVC collapsibility, as measured by POCUS, performs well in distinguishing fluid responders from non-responders, and may be used to guide IVF resuscitation among spontaneously breathing critically-ill patients.

Objective Assessment and Thematic Categorization of Patient-audible Information in an Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVES: The objective was to assess and categorize the understandable components of patient-audible information (e.g., provider conversations) in emergency department (ED) care areas and to initiate a baseline ED soundscape assessment. METHODS: Investigators at an academic referral hospital accessed 21 deidentified transcripts of recordings made with binaural in-ear microphones in patient rooms (n = 10) and spaces adjacent to nurses' stations (n = 11), during ED staff sign-outs as part of an approved quality management process. Transcribed materials were classified by speaker (health care provider, patient/family/friend, or unknown). Using qualitative analysis software and predefined thematic categories, two investigators then independently coded each transcript by word, phrase, clause, and/or sentence for general content, patient information, and HIPAA-defined patient identifiers. Scheduled reviews were used to resolve any data coding discrepancies. RESULTS: Patient room recordings featured a median of 11 (interquartile range [IQR] = 2 to 33) understandable words per minute (wpm) over 16.2 (IQR = 15.1 to 18.4) minutes; nurses' station recordings featured 74 (IQR = 47 to 109) understandable wpm over 17.0 (IQR = 15.4 to 20.3) minutes. Transcript content from patient room recordings was categorized as follows: clinical, 44.8% (IQR = 17.7% to 62.2%); nonclinical, 0.0% (IQR = 0.0% to 0.0%); inappropriate (provider), 0.0% (IQR = 0.0% to 0.0%); and unknown, 6.0% (IQR = 1.7% to 58.2%). Transcript content from nurses' stations was categorized as follows: clinical, 86.0% (IQR = 68.7% to 94.7%); nonclinical, 1.2% (IQR = 0.0% to 19.5%); inappropriate (provider), 0.1% (IQR = 0.0% to 2.3%); and unknown, 1.3% (IQR = 0.0% to 7.1%). Limited patient information was audible on patient room recordings. Audible patient information at nurses' stations was coded as follows (median words per sign-out sample): general patient history, 116 (IQR = 19 to 206); social history, 12 (IQR = 4 to 19); physical examination, 39 (IQR = 19 to 56); imaging results, 0 (IQR = 0 to 21); laboratory results, 7 (IQR = 0 to 22); other results, 0 (IQR = 0 to 3); medical decision-making, 39 (IQR = 10 to 69); management (general), 118 (IQR = 79 to 235); pain management, 4 (IQR = 0 to 53); and disposition, 42 (IQR = 22 to 60). Medians of 0 (IQR = 0 to 0) and 3 (IQR = 1 to 4) patient name identifiers were audible on in-room and nurses' station sign-out recordings, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Sound recordings in an ED setting captured audible and understandable provider discussions that included confidential, protected health information and discernible quantities of nonclinical content.