Jeanna Parsons Leigh

Ethical considerations in the de-adoption of ineffective or harmful aspects of healthcare.

De-adoption refers to the discontinuance of a medical practice or health service found to be ineffective or harmful following a previous period of adoption. As growing healthcare budgets threaten to cripple the societies that fund them, facilitating de-adoption may be integral to sustainable healthcare systems that provide high-quality care. This article explores ethical issues pertinent to de-adoption including the underpinnings of beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, and autonomy.

Patient, family and provider experiences with transfers from intensive care unit to hospital ward: a multicentre qualitative study

BACKGROUND: Transfer of patient care from an intensive care unit (ICU) to a hospital ward is often challenging, high risk and inefficient. We assessed patient and provider perspectives on barriers and facilitators to high-quality transfers and recommendations to improve the transfer process. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews of participants from a multicentre prospective cohort study of ICU transfers conducted at 10 hospitals across Canada. We purposively sampled 1 patient, 1 family member of a patient, 1 ICU provider, and 1 ward provider at each of the 8 English-speaking sites. Qualitative content analysis was used to derive themes, subthemes and recommendations. RESULTS: The 35 participants described 3 interrelated, overarching themes perceived as barriers or facilitators to high-quality patient transfers: resource availability, communication and institutional culture. Common recommendations suggested to improve ICU transfers included implementing standardized communication tools that streamline provider–provider and provider–patient communication, using multimodal communication to facilitate timely, accurate, durable and mutually reinforcing information transfer; and developing procedures to manage delays in transfer to ensure continuity of care for patients in the ICU waiting for a hospital ward bed. INTERPRETATION: Patient and provider perspectives attribute breakdown of ICU-to-ward transfers of care to resource availability, communication and institutional culture. Patients and providers recommend standardized, multimodal communication and transfer procedures to improve quality of care.

Continuity of Care for Complex Medical Patients: How Far Do We Go?

1. Barrett ML, Smith MW, Elixhauser A, Honigman LS, Pines JM. Utilization of intensive care services, 2011: Statistical Brief #185. Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Statistical Briefs. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2014. 2. Wunsch H, Linde-Zwirble WT, Angus DC, Hartman ME, Milbrandt EB, Kahn JM. The epidemiology of mechanical ventilation use in the United States. Crit Care Med 2010;38:1947–1953. 3. Wallace DJ, Angus DC, Seymour CW, Barnato AE, Kahn JM. Critical care bed growth in the United States: a comparison of regional and national trends. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2015;191: 410–416. 4. Boles JM, Bion J, Connors A, Herridge M, Marsh B, Melot C, Pearl R, Silverman H, Stanchina M, Vieillard-Baron A, et al. Weaning from mechanical ventilation. Eur Respir J 2007;29:1033–1056. 5. Tobin MJ. Extubation and the myth of “minimal ventilator settings”. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2012;185:349–350. 6. Mohsenifar Z, Hay A, Hay J, Lewis MI, Koerner SK. Gastric intramural pH as a predictor of success or failure in weaning patients from mechanical ventilation. Ann Intern Med 1993;119:794–798. 7. Straus C, Louis B, Isabey D, Lemaire F, Harf A, Brochard L. Contribution of the endotracheal tube and the upper airway to breathing workload. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998;157:23–30. 8. Appendini L, Purro A, Gudjonsdottir M, Baderna P, Patessio A, Zanaboni S, Donner CF, Rossi A. Physiologic response of ventilator-dependent patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to proportional assist ventilation and continuous positive airway pressure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1999;159:1510–1517. 9. Parthasarathy S, Jubran A, Laghi F, Tobin MJ. Sternomastoid, rib cage, and expiratory muscle activity during weaning failure. J Appl Physiol (1985) 2007;103:140–147. 10. Parthasarathy S, Jubran A, Tobin MJ. Assessment of neural inspiratory time in ventilator-supported patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;162:546–552. 11. Laghi F, Cattapan SE, Jubran A, Parthasarathy S, Warshawsky P, Choi YS, Tobin MJ. Is weaning failure caused by low-frequency fatigue of the diaphragm? Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2003;167:120–127. 12. Jubran A, Tobin MJ. Pathophysiologic basis of acute respiratory distress in patients who fail a trial of weaning from mechanical ventilation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1997;155:906–915. 13. Sklar MC, Burns K, Rittayamai N, Lanys A, Rauseo M, Chen L, Dres M, Chen G-Q, Goligher EC, Adhikari NK, et al. Effort to breathe with various spontaneous breathing trial techniques: a physiologic metaanalysis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2017;195:1477–1485. 14. Ouellette DR, Patel S, Girard TD, Morris PE, Schmidt GA, Truwit JD, Al-Hazzani W, Burns SM, Epstein SK, Esteban A, et al. Liberation from mechanical ventilation in critically ill adults: an official American College of Chest Physicians/American Thoracic Society clinical practice guideline: inspiratory pressure augmentation during spontaneous breathing trials, protocols minimizing sedation, and non-invasive ventilation immediately after extubation. Chest 2017;151:166–180.

Secondary EMR data for quality improvement and research: A comparison of manual and electronic data collection from an integrated critical care electronic medical record system

Purpose: This study measured the quality of data extracted from a clinical information system widely used for critical care quality improvement and research. Materials and methods: We abstracted data from 30 fields in a random sample of 207 patients admitted to nine adult, medical‐surgical intensive care units. We assessed concordance between data collected: (1) manually from the bedside system (eCritical MetaVision) by trained auditors, and (2) electronically from the system data warehouse (eCritical TRACER). Agreement was assessed using Cohens Kappa for categorical variables and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for continuous variables. Results: Concordance between data sets was excellent. There was perfect agreement for 11/30 variables (35%). The median Kappa score for the 16 categorical variables was 0.99 (IQR 0.92–1.00). APACHE II had an ICC of 0.936 (0.898–0.960). The lowest concordance was observed for SOFA renal and respiratory components (ICC 0.804 and 0.846, respectively). Score translation errors by the manual auditor were the most common source of data discrepancies. Conclusions: Manual validation processes of electronic data are complex in comparison to validation of traditional clinical documentation. This study represents a straightforward approach to validate the use of data repositories to support reliable and efficient use of high quality secondary use data. HighlightsEMR data validation processes for secondary data use are complex.Translation errors by manual auditors are a common source of dataset discrepancies.EMR system repositories provide high quality secondary use data for QI and research.Independent quality checks should be a fundamental part of any multipurpose EMR system.

Transfers from intensive care unit to hospital ward: a multicentre textual analysis of physician progress notes

BackgroundLittle is known about documentation during transitions of patient care between clinical specialties. Therefore, we examined the focus, structure and purpose of physician progress notes for patients transferred from the intensive care unit (ICU) to hospital ward to identify opportunities to improve communication breaks.MethodsThis was a prospective cohort study in ten Canadian hospitals. We analyzed physician progress notes for consenting adult patients transferred from a medical-surgical ICU to hospital ward. The number, length, legibility and content of notes was counted and compared across care settings using mixed-effects linear regression models accounting for clustering within hospitals. Qualitative content analyses were conducted on a stratified random sample of 32 patients.ResultsA total of 447 patient medical records that included 7052 progress notes (mean 2.1 notes/patient/day 95% CI 1.9–2.3) were analyzed. Notes written by the ICU team were significantly longer than notes written by the ward team (mean lines of text 21 vs. 15, p < 0.001). There was a discrepancy between documentation of patient issues in the last ICU and first ward notes; mean agreement of patient issues was 42% [95% CI 31–53%]. Qualitative analyses identified eight themes related to focus (central point – e.g., problem list), structure (organization, – e.g., note-taking style), and purpose (intention – e.g., documentation of patient course) of the notes that varied across clinical specialties and physician seniority.ConclusionsImportant gaps and variations in written documentation during transitions of patient care between ICU and hospital ward physicians are common, and include discrepancies in documentation of patient information.

Translating evidence to patient care through caregivers: a systematic review of caregiver-mediated interventions

BackgroundCaregivers may promote the uptake of science into patient care and the practice of evidence-informed medicine. The purpose of this study was to determine whether caregiver-mediated (non-clinical caregiver-delivered) interventions are effective in improving patient, caregiver, provider, or health system outcomes.MethodsWe searched the MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health, and Scopus databases from inception to February 27, 2017. Interventions (with a comparison group) reporting on a quality improvement intervention mediated by a caregiver and directed to a patient, in all ages and patient-care settings, were selected for inclusion. A three-category framework was developed to characterize caregiver-mediated interventions: inform (e.g., provide knowledge), activate (e.g., prompt action), and collaborate (e.g., lead to interaction between caregivers and other groups [e.g., care providers]).ResultsFifty-six studies met the inclusion criteria, and 64% were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The most commonly assessed outcomes were patient- (n = 40) and caregiver-oriented (n = 33); few health system- (n = 10) and provider-oriented (n = 2) outcomes were reported. Patient outcomes (e.g., satisfaction) were most improved by caregiver-mediated interventions that provided condition and treatment education (e.g., symptom management information) and practical condition-management support (e.g., practicing medication protocol). Caregiver outcomes (e.g., stress-related/psychiatric outcomes) were most improved by interventions that activated caregiver roles (e.g., monitoring blood glucose) and provided information related to that action (e.g., why and how to monitor). The risk of bias was generally high, and the overall quality of the evidence was low-moderate, based on Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation ratings.ConclusionsThere is a large body of research, including many RCTs, to support the use of caregiver-mediated interventions that inform and activate caregivers to improve patient and caregiver outcomes. Select caregiver-mediated interventions improve patient (inform-activate) and caregiver (inform-activate-collaborate) outcomes and should be considered by all researchers implementing patient- and family-oriented research.Systematic reviewPROSPERO, CRD42016052509.

Developing a framework to guide the de-adoption of low-value clinical practices in acute care medicine: a study protocol

BackgroundHealthcare systems have difficulty incorporating scientific evidence into clinical practice, especially when science suggests that existing clinical practices are of low-value (e.g. ineffective or harmful to patients). While a number of lists outlining low-value practices in acute care medicine currently exist, less is known about how best to initiate and sustain the removal of low-value clinical practices (i.e. de-adoption). This study will develop a comprehensive list of barriers and facilitators to the de-adoption of low-value clinical practices in acute care facilities to inform the development of a framework to guide the de-adoption process.MethodsThe proposed project is a multi-stage mixed methods study to develop a framework to guide the de-adoption of low-value clinical practices in acute care medicine that will be tested in a representative sample of acute care settings in Alberta, Canada. Specifically, we will: 1) conduct a systematic review of the de-adoption literature to identify published barriers and facilitators to the de-adoption of low-value clinical practices in acute care medicine and any associated interventions proposed (Phase one); 2) conduct focus groups with acute care stakeholders to identify important themes not published in the literature and obtain a comprehensive appreciation of stakeholder perspectives (Phase two); 3) extend the generalizability of focus group findings by conducting individual stakeholder surveys with a representative sample of acute care providers throughout the province to determine which barriers and facilitators identified in Phases one and two are most relevant in their clinical setting (Phase three). Identified barriers and facilitators will be catalogued and integrated with targeted interventions in a framework to guide the process of de-adoption in each of four targeted areas of acute care medicine (Emergency Medicine, Cardiovascular Health and Stroke, Surgery and Critical Care Medicine). Analyses will be descriptive using a combination of qualitative and quantitative analyses.DiscussionThere is a growing body of literature suggesting that the de-adoption of ineffective or harmful practices from patient care is integral to the delivery of high quality care and healthcare sustainability. The framework developed in this study will map barriers and facilitators to de-adoption to the most appropriate interventions, allowing stakeholders to effectively initiate, execute and sustain this process in an evidence-based manner.

Protocol to describe the analysis of text-based communication in medical records for patients discharged from intensive care to hospital ward

Introduction Effective communication during hospital transitions of patient care is fundamental to ensuring patient safety and continuity of quality care. This study will describe text-based communication included in patient medical records before, during and after patient transfer from the intensive care unit (ICU) to a hospital ward (n=10 days) by documenting (1) the structure and focus of physician progress notes within and between medical specialties, (2) the organisation of subjective and objective information, including the location and accessibility of patient data and whether/how this changes during the hospital stay and (3) missing, illegible and erroneous information. Methods This study is part of a larger mixed methods prospective observational study of ICU to hospital ward transfer practices in 10 ICUs across Canada. Medical records will be collected and photocopied for each consenting patient for a period of up to 10 consecutive days, including the final 2 days in the ICU, the day of transfer and the first 7 days on the ward (n=10 days). Textual analysis of medical record data will be completed by 2 independent reviewers to describe communication between stakeholders involved in ICU transfer. Ethics and dissemination Research ethics board approval has been obtained at all study sites, including the coordinating study centre (which covers 4 Calgary-based sites; UofC REB 13-0021) and 6 additional study sites (UofA Pro00050646; UBC PHC Hi4-01667; Sunnybrook 336-2014; QCH 20140345-01H; Sherbrooke 14-172; Laval 2015-2171). Findings from this study will inform the development of an evidence-based tool that will be used to systematically analyse the series of notes in a patients medical record.

Administrator Perspectives on ICU-to-Ward Transfers and Content Contained in Existing Transfer Tools: a Cross-sectional Survey

The transfer of critically ill patients from the intensive care unit (ICU) to hospital ward is challenging. Shortcomings in the delivery of care for patients transferred from the ICU have been associated with higher healthcare costs and poor satisfaction with care. Little is known about how hospital ward providers, who accept care of these patients, perceive current transfer practices nor which aspects of transfer they perceive as needing improvement. To compare ICU and ward administrator perspectives regarding ICU-to-ward transfer practices and evaluate the content of transfer tools. Cross-sectional survey design. We administered a survey to 128 medical and/or surgical ICU and 256 ward administrators to obtain institutional perspectives on ICU transfer practices. We performed qualitative content analysis on ICU transfer tools received from respondents. In total, 108 (77%) ICU and 160 (63%) ward administrators responded to the survey. The ICU attending physician was reported to be “primarily responsible” for the safety (93% vs. 91%; p = 0.515) of patient transfers. ICU administrators more commonly perceived discharge summaries to be routinely included in patient transfers than ward administrators (81% vs. 60%; p = 0.006). Both groups identified information provided to patients/families, patient/family participation during transfer, and ICU-ward collaboration as opportunities for improvement. A minority of hospitals used ICU-to-ward transfer tools (11%) of which most (n = 21 unique) were designed to communicate patient information between providers (71%) and comprised six categories of information: demographics, patient clinical course, corrective aids, mobility at discharge, review of systems, and documentation of transfer procedures. ICU and ward administrators have similar perspectives of transfer practices and identified patient/family engagement and communication as priorities for improvement. Key information categories exist.BackgroundThe transfer of critically ill patients from the intensive care unit (ICU) to hospital ward is challenging. Shortcomings in the delivery of care for patients transferred from the ICU have been associated with higher healthcare costs and poor satisfaction with care. Little is known about how hospital ward providers, who accept care of these patients, perceive current transfer practices nor which aspects of transfer they perceive as needing improvement.ObjectiveTo compare ICU and ward administrator perspectives regarding ICU-to-ward transfer practices and evaluate the content of transfer tools.DesignCross-sectional survey design.ParticipantsWe administered a survey to 128 medical and/or surgical ICU and 256 ward administrators to obtain institutional perspectives on ICU transfer practices. We performed qualitative content analysis on ICU transfer tools received from respondents.Key ResultsIn total, 108 (77%) ICU and 160 (63%) ward administrators responded to the survey. The ICU attending physician was reported to be “primarily responsible” for the safety (93% vs. 91%; p = 0.515) of patient transfers. ICU administrators more commonly perceived discharge summaries to be routinely included in patient transfers than ward administrators (81% vs. 60%; p = 0.006). Both groups identified information provided to patients/families, patient/family participation during transfer, and ICU-ward collaboration as opportunities for improvement. A minority of hospitals used ICU-to-ward transfer tools (11%) of which most (n = 21 unique) were designed to communicate patient information between providers (71%) and comprised six categories of information: demographics, patient clinical course, corrective aids, mobility at discharge, review of systems, and documentation of transfer procedures.ConclusionICU and ward administrators have similar perspectives of transfer practices and identified patient/family engagement and communication as priorities for improvement. Key information categories exist.

Identifying essential elements to include in Intensive Care Unit to hospital ward transfer summaries: A consensus methodology

Purpose: Transitions of care from the intensive care unit (ICU) to a hospital ward are high risk and contingent on effective communication. We sought to identify essential information elements to be included in an ICU to hospital ward transfer summary tool, and describe tool functionality and composition perceived to be important. Materials and methods: A panel of 13 clinicians representing ICU and hospital ward providers used a modified Delphi process to iteratively review and rate unique information elements identified from existing ICU transfer tools through three rounds of review (two remote and one in person). Qualitative content analysis was conducted on transcribed audio recordings of the workshop to characterize tool functionality and composition. Results: A total of 141 unique information elements were reviewed of which 63 were identified by panelists as essential. Qualitative content analyses of panelist discussions identified three themes related to how information elements should be considered when developing an ICU transfer summary tool: 1) Flexibility, 2) Usability, and 3) Accountability. Conclusion: We identified 63 distinct information elements identified as essential for inclusion in an ICU transfer summary tool to facilitate communication between providers during the transition of patient care from the ICU to a hospital ward.