Patricia C. Dykes

eHealth Technology and Internet Resources Barriers for Vulnerable Populations

Disparities in accessing health information exist for various vulnerable populations. Reviewing access issues for those seeking and/or needing health information suggests that there are many factors that may inhibit access. These include a wide diversity in the education, background, and needs of those seeking information, and the distribution of information among many disciplines and information sources. The most needy among this group may require extensive, multispecialty healthcare and may have particular problems with access, treatment adherence, and working within the healthcare system.

Why Do Patients in Acute Care Hospitals Fall? Can Falls Be Prevented?

Objective: Obtain the views of nurses and assistants as to why patients in acute care hospitals fall. Background: Despite a large quantitative evidence base for guiding fall risk assessment and not needing highly technical, scarce, or expensive equipment to prevent falls, falls are serious problems in hospitals. Methods: Basic content analysis methods were used to interpret descriptive data from 4 focus groups with nurses (n = 23) and 4 with assistants (n = 19). A 2-person consensus approach was used for analysis. Results: Positive and negative components of 6 concepts-patient report, information access, signage, environment, teamwork, and involving patient/family-formed 2 core categories: knowledge/ communication and capability/actions that are facilitators or barriers, respectively, to preventing falls. Conclusion: Two conditions are required to reduce patient falls. A patient care plan including current and accurate fall risk status with associated tailored and feasible interventions needs to be easily and immediately accessible to all stakeholders (entire healthcare team, patients, and family). Second, stakeholders must use that information plus their own knowledge and skills and patient and hospital resources to carry out the plan.

Dashboards for improving patient care : review of the literature

AIM This review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of evidence for the use of clinical and quality dashboards in health care environments. METHODS A literature search was performed for the dates 1996-2012 on CINAHL, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsychInfo, Science Direct and ACM Digital Library. A citation search and a hand search of relevant papers were also conducted. RESULTS One hundred and twenty two full text papers were retrieved of which 11 were included in the review. There was considerable heterogeneity in implementation setting, dashboard users and indicators used. There was evidence that in contexts where dashboards were easily accessible to clinicians (such as in the form of a screen saver) their use was associated with improved care processes and patient outcomes. CONCLUSION There is some evidence that implementing clinical and/or quality dashboards that provide immediate access to information for clinicians can improve adherence to quality guidelines and may help improve patient outcomes. However, further high quality detailed research studies need to be conducted to obtain evidence of their efficacy and establish guidelines for their design.

Patients' perspectives of falling while in an acute care hospital and suggestions for prevention

Patient falls and falls with injury are the largest category of reportable incidents and a significant problem in hospitals. Patients are an important part of fall prevention; therefore, we asked patients who have fallen about reason for fall and how falls could be prevented. There were two categories for falls: the need to toilet coupled with loss of balance and unexpected weakness. Patients asked to be included in fall risk communication and asked to be part of the team to prevent them from falling. Nurses need to share a consistent and clear message that they are there for patient safety.

Benefits and Risks of Using Smart Pumps to Reduce Medication Error Rates: A Systematic Review

BackgroundSmart infusion pumps have been introduced to prevent medication errors and have been widely adopted nationally in the USA, though they are not always used in Europe or other regions. Despite widespread usage of smart pumps, intravenous medication errors have not been fully eliminated.ObjectiveThrough a systematic review of recent studies and reports regarding smart pump implementation and use, we aimed to identify the impact of smart pumps on error reduction and on the complex process of medication administration, and strategies to maximize the benefits of smart pumps.MethodsThe medical literature related to the effects of smart pumps for improving patient safety was searched in PUBMED, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2000–2014) and relevant papers were selected by two researchers.ResultsAfter the literature search, 231 papers were identified and the full texts of 138 articles were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 22 were included after removal of papers that did not meet the inclusion criteria. We assessed both the benefits and negative effects of smart pumps from these studies. One of the benefits of using smart pumps was intercepting errors such as the wrong rate, wrong dose, and pump setting errors. Other benefits include reduction of adverse drug event rates, practice improvements, and cost effectiveness. Meanwhile, the current issues or negative effects related to using smart pumps were lower compliance rates of using smart pumps, the overriding of soft alerts, non-intercepted errors, or the possibility of using the wrong drug library.ConclusionThe literature suggests that smart pumps reduce but do not eliminate programming errors. Although the hard limits of a drug library play a main role in intercepting medication errors, soft limits were still not as effective as hard limits because of high override rates. Compliance in using smart pumps is key towards effectively preventing errors. Opportunities for improvement include upgrading drug libraries, developing standardized drug libraries, decreasing the number of unnecessary warnings, and developing stronger approaches to minimize workarounds. Also, as with other clinical information systems, smart pumps should be implemented with the idea of using continuous quality improvement processes to iteratively improve their use.

Electronic Health Records and Personal Health Records

OBJECTIVES To provide an overview of electronic personal health information technology. DATA SOURCES Peer reviewed research studies, review articles, and web resources. CONCLUSION As technology develops and electronic health records become more common, patients and clinicians are working toward a safer, more personal form of health care delivery. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE Improving access and input to personal health information is still in its infancy, but with government funding, development of patient health records will continue to grow. Patients are the consumers of health care and are witness to the paradigm shift of access to health information and changes in information communication technology (ICT). For the oncology nurse, the transformation of health care and ICT will require nurses to educate patients and family members on available online resources for self management and health promotion.

Are We Heeding the Warning Signs? Examining Providers’ Overrides of Computerized Drug-Drug Interaction Alerts in Primary Care

Background Health IT can play a major role in improving patient safety. Computerized physician order entry with decision support can alert providers to potential prescribing errors. However, too many alerts can result in providers ignoring and overriding clinically important ones. Objective To evaluate the appropriateness of providers’ drug-drug interaction (DDI) alert overrides, the reasons why they chose to override these alerts, and what actions they took as a consequence of the alert. Design A cross-sectional, observational study of DDI alerts generated over a three-year period between January 1st, 2009, and December 31st, 2011. Setting Primary care practices affiliated with two Harvard teaching hospitals. The DDI alerts were screened to minimize the number of clinically unimportant warnings. Participants A total of 24,849 DDI alerts were generated in the study period, with 40% accepted. The top 62 providers with the highest override rate were identified and eight overrides randomly selected for each (a total of 496 alert overrides for 438 patients, 3.3% of the sample). Results Overall, 68.2% (338/496) of the DDI alert overrides were considered appropriate. Among inappropriate overrides, the therapeutic combinations put patients at increased risk of several specific conditions including: serotonin syndrome (21.5%, n=34), cardiotoxicity (16.5%, n=26), or sharp falls in blood pressure or significant hypotension (28.5%, n=45). A small number of drugs and DDIs accounted for a disproportionate share of alert overrides. Of the 121 appropriate alert overrides where the provider indicated they would “monitor as recommended”, a detailed chart review revealed that only 35.5% (n=43) actually did. Providers sometimes reported that patients had already taken interacting medications together (15.7%, n=78), despite no evidence to confirm this. Conclusions and Relevance We found that providers continue to override important and useful alerts that are likely to cause serious patient injuries, even when relatively few false positive alerts are displayed.

A web-based, patient-centered toolkit to engage patients and caregivers in the acute care setting: a preliminary evaluation

We implemented a web-based, patient-centered toolkit that engages patients/caregivers in the hospital plan of care by facilitating education and patient-provider communication. Of the 585 eligible patients approached on medical intensive care and oncology units, 239 were enrolled (119 patients, 120 caregivers). The most common reason for not approaching the patient was our inability to identify a health care proxy when a patient was incapacitated. Significantly more caregivers were enrolled in medical intensive care units compared with oncology units (75% vs 32%; P < .01). Of the 239 patient/caregivers, 158 (66%) and 97 (41%) inputted a daily and overall goal, respectively. Use of educational content was highest for medications and test results and infrequent for problems. The most common clinical theme identified in 291 messages sent by 158 patients/caregivers was health concerns, needs, preferences, or questions (19%, 55 of 291). The average system usability scores and satisfaction ratings of a sample of surveyed enrollees were favorable. From analysis of feedback, we identified barriers to adoption and outlined strategies to promote use.

Building and Testing a Patient-Centric Electronic Bedside Communication Center

In this article, the authors describe the development and pilot testing of an electronic bedside communication center (eBCC) prototype to improve access to health information for hospitalized adults and their family caregivers. Focus groups were used to identify improvements for the initial eBCC prototype developed by the research team. Face-to-face bedside interviews and questions were presented while patients used the eBCC for usability testing to drive further development. Qualitative methods within an iterative, participatory approach supported the development of an eBCC prototype that was considered both easy to use and helpful for accessing tailored patient information during an inpatient hospitalization to receive acute care.

Methodology issues in implementation science.

Background:Putting evidence into practice at the point of care delivery requires an understanding of implementation strategies that work, in what context and how. Objective:To identify methodological issues in implementation science using 4 studies as cases and make recommendations for further methods development. Research Design:Four cases are presented and methodological issues identified. For each issue raised, evidence on the state of the science is described. Results:Issues in implementation science identified include diverse conceptual frameworks, potential weaknesses in pragmatic study designs, and the paucity of standard concepts and measurement. Conclusions:Recommendations to advance methods in implementation include developing a core set of implementation concepts and metrics, generating standards for implementation methods including pragmatic trials, mixed methods designs, complex interventions and measurement, and endorsing reporting standards for implementation studies.