1
Introduction & Background Aim Methods Lessons Learned References: 1. Huang GC et al. Beyond the Comfort Zone: Residents Assess Their Comfort Performing Inpatient Medical Procedures. American Journal of Medicine (2006) 119, 71.e17-71.e24. 2. The Joint Comission. Speak Up: The Universal Protocol for Preventing Wrong Site, Wrong Procedure, and Wrong Person Surgery. https://www.jointcomission.org/assets/1/18/UP_Poster1.pdf GOAL: Improve the safety of patients undergoing bedside procedures while maintaining the full spectrum of graduated autonomy in procedure training for residents. SMART Aim: Increase the rate of timeouts documented for bedside procedures from 29% to 50% by June 2018. A survey was distributed to house staff to assess attitudes regarding timeouts for bedside procedures to ascertain baseline attitudes surrounding timeouts (Figure 1). The Vizient Database was queried for thoracentesis, paracentesis, and lumbar punctures, representative bedside procedures, performed between July and September 2017 in order to establish a baseline rate of performance of preprocedural timeout. 234 charts were identified and reviewed. The average timeout documentation rate was 29% (Figure 2). Two interventions were trialed: a visual Timeout checklist placed on ultrasounds and procedure kits in the medical intensive care unit, and a simulated case to educate residents on procedure documentation methods. Our interventions had moderate success in: a) Raising awareness of the need to perform a high-quality interprofessional timeout b) Increasing self-reported rate of timeout performance in the MICU c) Creating a highly valued, self-paced learning opportunity for appropriate documentation. Limitations include the small sample size, single unit implementation of the checklist, and short duration of follow-through. The fact that the pre- and post-intervention sample sizes were not identical suggests that the same participants did not complete the survey, which introduces some reporting bias. It is also possible that residents who did not complete a timeout did not complete the survey. Results Educational interventions are often considered low yield. For processes reliant on trainees, where staff turnover happens yearly, it is important that education is hard wired, and that EHR infrastructure and institutional culture support safe patient care practices. Multipronged approaches are more likely to be effective than single interventions. Conclusions In academic medical centers, invasive bedside procedures are frequently performed by trainees. 1 Universal protocol and timeout are to be performed prior to any invasive procedure to avoid 'never events’. 2 After Joint Commission and Clinical Learning Environment Review (CLER), bedside procedural safety was identified as a area for improvement at our institution. The Housestaff Quality and Safety Leadership Council elected improving timeout rates as our 2017 improvement project. Improving Bedside Procedural Safety through Optimizing Timeout Documentation and a Pre-procedure Checklist Jennifer Harris MD, R. Benson Jones MD, Kristin Lohr MD, Grant Turner MD, Drew Kotler MD, Justine Blum MD, Megan Margiotta MD, Matthew Bokhari MD, Erica Li MD, Riti Kanesa-Thasan MD, Bracken Babula MD, Rebecca Jaffe MD Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia PA N = 45, representing diverse specialties N = 45, representing diverse specialties Figure 1: 66% of house staff respondents thought that timeouts are important to ensuring procedural safety, however only 50% of respondents thought that timeouts prior to the intervention were high or highest quality. 29% Figure 2: Bedside procedures were identified for review within the Vizient database. Wide variation was apparent in the rate of documenting a timeout depending on the procedure, with an average documentation rate of 29%. Figure 3: Copy of timeout checklist. Figure 4: Results of pre and post-intervention survey. Rate of reported timeouts consistently performed improved from 31% to 86%; rate of reported nursing involvement in bedside procedures improved from 27% to 64%. Checklist Intervention During a one-month pilot, 64% of residents (N = 14) in the medical ICU reported noticing the timeout checklist signs (Figure 3), and 50% of residents reported that the signs increased the likelihood that they would perform a timeout (Figure 4). surveyed Before and after placement of the checklists, residents were surveyed regarding the likelihood of both involving nursing staff and performing a timeout prior to an invasive bedside procedure. Procedure Documentation Intervention Notable heterogeneity was observed in procedure documentation methods within Epic, including free text notes, dot phrases, and use of the Procedure Documenter. The Procedure Documenter is the preferred method of documenting, and, when surveyed, residents who used the documenter reported a high degree of satisfaction. We designed a case for use in a simulated EHR environment allowing residents to practice this documentation method and teaching "tips and tricks" for efficient note writing. We conducted usability testing with 16 residents across varied GME specialties to determine the value of this exercises. Average of 5 minutes to complete one case Only 62% already used process demonstrated to document procedures 75% reported learning new tools to document procedures and 50% reported they will change the way they document procedures in the future 88% of respondents felt the cases had moderate to high educational value Next steps include: Improve modeling of timeouts by supervising physicians, including senior residents, fellows, and faculty Partnering with nursing leadership to develop robust and better defined interprofessional processes Incorporating periprocedural education in all required procedure training sessions, including our simulated documentation case Identifying accurate sources of data for audit and feedback interventions and to track change over time The probability of success in changing invasive bedside procedure safety culture improves when both nurses and housestaff play a role in the pre- procedure timeout.

Checklist Improving Bedside Procedural Safety through

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    1

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Checklist Improving Bedside Procedural Safety through

Intr

oduc

tion

& B

ackg

roun

d

Aim

Met

hods

Less

ons L

earn

ed

Refe

renc

es:

1.Hu

ang

GC e

t al.

Beyo

nd th

e Co

mfo

rt Z

one:

Res

iden

ts A

sses

s The

ir Co

mfo

rt P

erfo

rmin

g In

patie

nt M

edic

al P

roce

dure

s. Am

eric

an Jo

urna

l of M

edic

ine

(200

6) 1

19, 7

1.e1

7-71

.e24

.2.

The

Join

t Com

issio

n. S

peak

Up:

The

Uni

vers

al P

roto

col f

or P

reve

ntin

g W

rong

Site

, Wro

ng

Proc

edur

e, a

nd W

rong

Per

son

Surg

ery.

http

s://

ww

w.jo

intc

omiss

ion.

org/

asse

ts/1

/18/

UP_P

oste

r1.p

df

GOAL

:Im

prov

eth

esa

fety

ofpa

tient

sun

derg

oing

beds

ide

proc

edur

esw

hile

mai

ntai

ning

the

full

spec

trum

ofgr

adua

ted

auto

nom

yin

proc

edur

etr

aini

ngfo

rres

iden

ts.

SMAR

TAi

m:

Incr

ease

the

rate

oftim

eout

sdo

cum

ente

dfo

rbed

side

proc

edur

esfr

om29

%to

50%

byJu

ne20

18.

Asu

rvey

was

dist

ribut

edto

hous

est

afft

oas

sess

attit

udes

rega

rdin

gtim

eout

sfo

rbe

dsid

epr

oced

ures

toas

cert

ain

base

line

attit

udes

surr

ound

ing

timeo

uts(

Figu

re1)

.Th

eVi

zient

Data

base

was

quer

ied

for

thor

acen

tesis

,pa

race

ntes

is,an

dlu

mba

rpu

nctu

res,

repr

esen

tativ

ebe

dsid

epr

oced

ures

,pe

rfor

med

betw

een

July

and

Sept

embe

r20

17in

orde

rto

esta

blish

aba

selin

era

teof

perf

orm

ance

ofpr

epro

cedu

ral

timeo

ut.

234

char

tsw

ere

iden

tifie

dan

dre

view

ed.

The

aver

age

timeo

utdo

cum

enta

tion

rate

was

29%

(Fig

ure

2).

Two

inte

rven

tions

wer

etr

iale

d:a

visu

alTi

meo

utch

eckl

istpl

aced

onul

tras

ound

san

dpr

oced

ure

kits

inth

em

edic

alin

tens

ive

care

unit,

and

asim

ulat

edca

seto

educ

ate

resid

ents

onpr

oced

ure

docu

men

tatio

nm

etho

ds.

Our

inte

rven

tions

had

mod

erat

e su

cces

s in:

a)Ra

ising

aw

aren

ess o

f the

nee

d to

per

form

a

high

-qua

lity

inte

rpro

fess

iona

ltim

eout

b)In

crea

sing

self-

repo

rted

rate

of t

imeo

ut

perf

orm

ance

in th

e M

ICU

c)Cr

eatin

ga

high

lyva

lued

,se

lf-pa

ced

lear

ning

oppo

rtun

ityfo

rapp

ropr

iate

docu

men

tatio

n.

Lim

itatio

nsin

clud

eth

esm

all

sam

ple

size,

singl

eun

itim

plem

enta

tion

ofth

ech

eckl

ist,

and

shor

tdu

ratio

nof

follo

w-th

roug

h.Th

efa

ctth

atth

epr

e-an

dpo

st-in

terv

entio

nsa

mpl

esiz

esw

ere

not

iden

tical

sugg

ests

that

the

sam

epa

rtic

ipan

tsdi

dno

tco

mpl

ete

the

surv

ey,w

hich

intr

oduc

esso

me

repo

rtin

gbi

as.

Itis

also

poss

ible

that

resid

ents

who

did

notc

ompl

ete

atim

eout

did

notc

ompl

ete

the

surv

ey.

Resu

lts

Educ

atio

nal

inte

rven

tions

are

ofte

nco

nsid

ered

low

yiel

d.Fo

rpro

cess

esre

liant

ontr

aine

es,w

here

staf

ftur

nove

rha

ppen

sye

arly

,it

isim

port

ant

that

educ

atio

nis

hard

wire

d,an

dth

atEH

Rin

fras

truc

ture

and

inst

itutio

nal

cultu

resu

ppor

tsa

fepa

tient

care

prac

tices

.M

ultip

rong

edap

proa

ches

are

mor

elik

ely

tobe

effe

ctiv

eth

ansin

gle

inte

rven

tions

.

Conc

lusio

ns

Inac

adem

icm

edic

alce

nter

s,in

vasiv

ebe

dsid

epr

oced

ures

are

freq

uent

lype

rfor

med

bytr

aine

es.1

Univ

ersa

lpro

toco

land

timeo

utar

eto

bepe

rfor

med

prio

rto

any

inva

sive

proc

edur

eto

avoi

d'n

ever

even

ts’.2

Afte

rJoi

ntCo

mm

issio

nan

dCl

inic

alLe

arni

ngEn

viro

nmen

tRe

view

(CLE

R),

beds

ide

proc

edur

alsa

fety

was

iden

tifie

das

aar

eafo

rim

prov

emen

tat

our

inst

itutio

n.Th

eHo

uses

taff

Qua

lity

and

Safe

tyLe

ader

ship

Coun

cil

elec

ted

impr

ovin

gtim

eout

rate

sas

our

2017

impr

ovem

entp

roje

ct.

Impr

ovin

g Be

dsid

e Pr

oced

ural

Saf

ety

thro

ugh

Opt

imiz

ing

Tim

eout

Doc

umen

tati

on a

nd a

Pre

-pro

cedu

re C

heck

list

Jenn

ifer

Har

ris

MD

, R.

Ben

son

Jone

s M

D,

Kris

tin

Lohr

MD

, G

rant

Tur

ner

MD

, D

rew

Kot

ler

MD

, Ju

stin

e Bl

um M

D,

Meg

an M

argi

otta

MD

, M

atth

ew B

okha

riM

D,

Eric

a Li

MD

, Ri

tiKa

nesa

-Tha

san

MD

, Br

acke

n Ba

bula

MD

, Re

becc

a Ja

ffe

MD

Thom

as J

eff

ers

on U

niv

ers

ity

Hos

pit

al,

Philad

elp

hia

PA

N =

45, r

epre

sent

ing

dive

rse

spec

ialti

esN

= 45

, rep

rese

ntin

g di

vers

e sp

ecia

lties

Figu

re1:

66%

ofho

use

staf

fre

spon

dent

sth

ough

tth

attim

eout

sar

eim

port

ant

toen

surin

gpr

oced

ural

safe

ty,

how

ever

only

50%

ofre

spon

dent

sth

ough

tth

attim

eout

spr

iort

oth

ein

terv

entio

nw

ere

high

orhi

ghes

tqua

lity.

29%

Figu

re2:

Beds

ide

proc

edur

esw

ere

iden

tifie

dfo

rre

view

with

inth

eVi

zient

data

base

.Wid

eva

riatio

nw

asap

pare

ntin

the

rate

ofdo

cum

entin

ga

timeo

utde

pend

ing

onth

epr

oced

ure,

with

anav

erag

edo

cum

enta

tion

rate

of29

%.

Figu

re 3

: Cop

y of

tim

eout

che

cklis

t.

Figu

re4:

Resu

ltsof

pre

and

post

-inte

rven

tion

surv

ey.

Rate

ofre

port

edtim

eout

sco

nsist

ently

perf

orm

edim

prov

edfr

om31

%to

86%

;rat

eof

repo

rted

nurs

ing

invo

lvem

enti

nbe

dsid

epr

oced

ures

impr

oved

from

27%

to64

%.

Chec

klist

Inte

rven

tion

Durin

ga

one-

mon

thpi

lot,

64%

ofre

siden

ts(N

=14

)in

the

med

ical

ICU

repo

rted

notic

ing

the

timeo

utch

eckl

istsig

ns(F

igur

e3)

,and

50%

ofre

siden

tsre

port

edth

atth

esig

nsin

crea

sed

the

likel

ihoo

dth

atth

eyw

ould

perf

orm

atim

eout

(Fig

ure

4).

surv

eyed

Befo

rean

daf

ter

plac

emen

tof

the

chec

klist

s,re

siden

tsw

ere

surv

eyed

rega

rdin

gth

elik

elih

ood

ofbo

thin

volv

ing

nurs

ing

staf

fan

dpe

rfor

min

ga

timeo

utpr

iort

oan

inva

sive

beds

ide

proc

edur

e.

Proc

edur

eDo

cum

enta

tion

Inte

rven

tion

Nota

ble

hete

roge

neity

was

obse

rved

inpr

oced

ure

docu

men

tatio

nm

etho

dsw

ithin

Epic

,inc

ludi

ngfr

eete

xtno

tes,

dot

phra

ses,

and

use

ofth

ePr

oced

ure

Docu

men

ter.

The

Proc

edur

eDo

cum

ente

ris

the

pref

erre

dm

etho

dof

docu

men

ting,

and,

whe

nsu

rvey

ed,r

esid

ents

who

used

the

docu

men

terr

epor

ted

ahi

ghde

gree

ofsa

tisfa

ctio

n.W

ede

signe

da

case

for

use

ina

simul

ated

EHR

envi

ronm

ent

allo

win

gre

siden

tsto

prac

tice

this

docu

men

tatio

nm

etho

dan

dte

achi

ng"t

ipsa

ndtr

icks

"for

effic

ient

note

writ

ing.

We

cond

ucte

dus

abili

tyte

stin

gw

ith16

resid

ents

acro

ssva

ried

GME

spec

ialti

esto

dete

rmin

eth

eva

lue

ofth

isex

erci

ses.

•Av

erag

eof

5m

inut

esto

com

plet

eon

eca

se

•O

nly

62%

alre

ady

used

proc

essd

emon

stra

ted

todo

cum

entp

roce

dure

s

•75

%re

port

edle

arni

ngne

wto

olst

odo

cum

entp

roce

dure

sand

50%

repo

rted

they

will

chan

geth

ew

ayth

eydo

cum

entp

roce

dure

sin

the

futu

re

•88

%of

resp

onde

ntsf

eltt

heca

sesh

adm

oder

ate

tohi

ghed

ucat

iona

lval

ue

Next

step

s inc

lude

:

•Im

prov

em

odel

ing

oftim

eout

sby

supe

rvisi

ngph

ysic

ians

,in

clud

ing

seni

orre

siden

ts,

fello

ws,

and

facu

lty•

Part

nerin

gw

ithnu

rsin

gle

ader

ship

tode

velo

pro

bust

and

bett

erde

fined

inte

rpro

fess

iona

lpr

oces

ses

•In

corp

orat

ing

perip

roce

dura

led

ucat

ion

inal

lre

quire

dpr

oced

ure

trai

ning

sess

ions

,in

clud

ing

ours

imul

ated

docu

men

tatio

nca

se•

Iden

tifyi

ngac

cura

teso

urce

sof

data

fora

udit

and

feed

back

inte

rven

tions

and

totr

ack

chan

geov

ertim

e

The

prob

abili

tyof

succ

ess

inch

angi

ngin

vasiv

ebe

dsid

epr

oced

ure

safe

tycu

lture

impr

oves

whe

nbo

thnu

rses

and

hous

esta

ffpl

aya

role

inth

epr

e-pr

oced

ure

timeo

ut.