Search

Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess whether bundled team training interventions for surgeons and office staff could effectively improve the accuracy of surgery scheduling, minimizing scheduling factors that may contribute to occurrence of wrong site surgery., Methods: This quasi-experimental observational study used an interrupted time series design to explore surgery scheduling errors (SSEs) and implemented bundled team training interventions intended to reduce SSEs at a Pacific Northwest Regional Surgery Scheduling Department. Each preintervention and postintervention segment consisted of 16 weekly data points. The bundled team training interventions included disclosure of preintervention scheduling errors, a scheduling verification checklist, an updated surgery scheduling policy and procedure, and toolkit to improve office scheduling of surgeries., Results: Improvements in SSEs were observed preintervention to postintervention, with decreased surgery SSE rate from 0.51% to 0.13% (P < 0.001). Reductions were observed in all SSE types. The segmented linear trend demonstrated an observed reduction of 42.70 SSE (P < 0.001)., Conclusions: This is the first study conducted at a large healthcare system with a regional surgery scheduling department to demonstrate that statistically significant and clinically important reductions in SSEs can be achieved. The findings demonstrate that SSEs can be minimized and confirm that verification processes must begin in the surgeon's office once a decision has been reached to proceed with surgery. The study confirms the need for additional research targeted at understanding why SSEs occur at the time of scheduling., Competing Interests: The authors disclose no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Nurses in acute care settings are affected by the technologies they use, including electronic health records. This study investigated the impacts of adoption of a comprehensive electronic health record by measuring nursing locations and interventions in three units before and 12 months after adoption. Time-motion methodology with a handheld recording platform based on Omaha System standardized terminology was used to collect location and intervention data. In addition, investigators administered the Caring Efficacy Scale to better understand the effects of the electronic health record on nursing care efficacy. Several differences were noted after the electronic health record was adopted. Nurses spent significantly more time in patient rooms and less in other measured locations. They spent more time overall performing nursing interventions, with increased time in documentation and medication administration, but less time reporting and providing patient-family teaching. Both before and after electronic health record adoption, nurses spent most of their time in case management interventions (coordinating, planning, and communicating). Nurses showed a slight decrease in perceived caring efficacy after adoption. While initial findings demonstrated a trend toward increased time efficiency, questions remain regarding nurse satisfaction, patient satisfaction, quality and safety outcomes, and cost.

Objective: To determine the relationship between implementation of rapid response teams and improved mortality rate using a large, uniform dataset from one state in the United States., Design: This observational cohort study included 471,062 adult patients hospitalized between 2001 and 2009., Setting: Ten acute tertiary care hospitals in Washington State., Patients or Other Participants: Hospital abstract records on adult patients (18 years old or older) were examined (n = 471,062). Patients most likely to benefit from rapid response team interventions were included and other prognostic factors of severity of illness and comorbidities were controlled. Each participating hospital provided the implementation date of their rapid response team intervention. Mortality rates in 31 months before rapid response team implementation (pre-rapid response team time period) were compared with mortality rates in 31 months following rapid response team implementation (post-rapid response team time period)., Intervention(s): Implementation of a rapid response team within each acute tertiary care hospital., Measurements and Main Results: In-hospital mortality. Relative risk for in-hospital mortality improved in the post-rapid response team time period compared with the pre-rapid response team time period (relative risk = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.72-0.80; p < 0.001)., Conclusions: In-hospital mortality improved in six of 10 acute tertiary care hospitals in the post-rapid response team time period when compared with the pre-rapid response team time period. Because of a long-term trend of decline in hospital mortality, these decreases could not be unambiguously attributed to rapid response team implementation. Further research should examine additional objective outcomes and optimal configuration of rapid response teams to maximize intervention effectiveness.

Background: Complex, interconnected issues challenge the United States health care system and the patients and families it serves. System fragmentation, limited resources, rigid disciplinary boundaries, institutional culture, ineffective communication, and uncertainty surrounding health policy legislation are contributing to suboptimal care delivery and patient outcomes., Methods: These problems are too complex to be solved by a single discipline. Interdisciplinary research affords the opportunity to examine and solve some of these problems from a more integrative perspective using innovative and rigorous methodological designs., Results: In this paper, we explore lessons learned from exemplars funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's Interdisciplinary Nursing Quality Research Initiative., Discussion: The discussion is framed using an adaptation of the Interdisciplinary Research Model to evaluate improvements in individual health outcomes, health systems, and health policy. Barriers and facilitators to designing, conducting, and translating interdisciplinary research are discussed. Implications for health system and policy changes, including the need to provide funding mechanisms to implement interdisciplinary processes in both research and clinical practice, are provided.