Search

Objective: This report describes a root cause analysis of incorrect provider assignments and a standardized workflow developed to improve the clarity and accuracy of provider assignments., Materials and Methods: A multidisciplinary working group involving housestaff was assembled. Key drivers were identified using value stream mapping and fishbone analysis. A report was developed to allow for the analysis of correct provider assignments. A standardized workflow was created and piloted with a single service line. Pre- and post-pilot surveys were administered to nursing staff and participating housestaff on the unit., Results: Four key drivers were identified. A standardized workflow was created with an exclusive treatment team role in Epic held by a single provider at any given time, with a corresponding patient list column displaying provider information for each patient. Pre- and post-survey responses report decreased confusion, decreased provider identification errors, and increased user satisfaction among RNs and residents with sustained uptake over time., Conclusion: This work demonstrates structured root cause analysis, notably engaging housestaff, to develop a standardized workflow for an understudied and growing problem. The development of tools and strategies to address the widespread burdens resulting from clinical communication failures is needed., Competing Interests: None of the authors have any competing interests to declare., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association.)

Background: Innovative solutions to nursing care are needed to address nurse, health system, patient, and caregiver concerns related to nursing wellness, work flexibility and control, workforce retention and pipeline, and access to patient care. One innovative approach includes a novel health care delivery model enabling nurse-led, off-hours wound care (PocketRN) to triage emergent concerns and provide additional patient health education via telehealth., Objective: This pilot study aimed to evaluate the implementation of PocketRN from the perspective of nurses and patients., Methods: Patients and part-time or per-diem, wound care-certified and generalist nurses were recruited through the Stanford Medicine Advanced Wound Care Center in 2021 and 2022. Qualitative data included semistructured interviews with nurses and patients and clinical documentation review. Quantitative data included app use and brief end-of-interaction in-app satisfaction surveys., Results: This pilot study suggests that an app-based nursing care delivery model is acceptable, clinically appropriate, and feasible. Low technology literacy had a modest effect on initial patient adoption; this barrier was addressed with built-in outreach and by simplifying the patient experience (eg, via phone instead of video calls). This approach was acceptable for users, despite total patient enrollment and use numbers being lower than anticipated (N=49; 17/49, 35% of patients used the app at least once beyond the orientation call). We interviewed 10 patients: 7 who had used the app were satisfied with it and reported that real-time advice after hours reduced anxiety, and 3 who had not used the app after enrollment reported having other resources for health care advice and noted their perception that this tool was meant for urgent issues, which did not occur for them. Interviewed nurses (n=10) appreciated working from home, and they reported comfort with the scope of practice and added quality of care facilitated by video capabilities; there was interest in additional wound care-specific training for nonspecialized nurses. Nurses were able to provide direct patient care over the web, including the few participating nurses who were unable to perform in-person care (n=2)., Conclusions: This evaluation provides insights into the integration of technology into standard health care services, such as in-clinic wound care. Using in-system nurses with access to electronic medical records and specialized knowledge facilitated app integration and continuity of care. This care delivery model satisfied nurse desires for flexible and remote work and reduced patient anxiety, potentially reducing postoperative wound care complications. Feasibility was negatively impacted by patients' technology literacy and few language options; additional patient training, education, and language support are needed to support equitable access. Adoption was impacted by a lack of perceived need for additional care; lower-touch or higher-acuity settings with a longer wait between visits could be a better fit for this type of nurse-led care., (©Cati G Brown-Johnson, Anna Sophia Lessios, Samuel Thomas, Mirini Kim, Eri Fukaya, Siqi Wu, Samantha M R Kling, Gretchen Brown, Marcy Winget. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org), 23.08.2023.)

The value of integrating palliative with curative modes of care earlier in the course of disease for people with life threatening illnesses is well recognized. Whereas the now outdated model of waiting for people to be actively dying before initiating palliative care has been clearly discredited on clinical grounds, how a better integration of modes of care can be achieved, financed and sustained is an ongoing challenge for the health care system in general as well as for specific institutions. When the initiative comes from a hospital or academic medical center, which may, for example, begin a palliative care consultation service, financial benefits have been well documented. These palliative care services survive mainly by tracking cost savings that can be realized in a number of ways around a medical center. We tried to pilot 3 simple models of potential cost savings afforded to hospice by initiating a palliative care program. We found that simple models cannot capture this benefit (if it in fact exists). By adding palliative care, hospice, while no doubt improving and streamlining care, is also taking on more complex patients (higher drug costs, shorter length of stay, more outpatient, emergency room and physician visits). Indeed, the hospice was absorbing the losses associated with having the palliative care program. We suggest that an avenue for future exploration is whether partnering between hospitals and hospice programs can defray some of the costs incurred by the palliative care program (that might otherwise be passed on to hospice) in anticipation of cost savings. We end with a series of questions: Are there financial benefits? Can they be modeled and quantified? Is this a dilemma for hospice programs wanting to improve the quality of care but who are not able on their own to finance it?