BACKGROUND:As more hospitals transition to electronic health records (EHR) and rely on technology to inform practice, what is done with that information is increasingly important. Performance report cards for physicians and nurses are not new, yet there is little recent evidence on nurse-specific audit and feedback.AIM:The aim of the project was to conduct an evidence-based practice (EBP) review to answer the question, "Does implementing an individualized audit and feedback report tool for nurses improve compliance, adherence, and/or performance of nursing tasks?".METHODS:Evidence was gathered from several databases. Reviewers read and appraised articles that answered the EBP question using the Johns Hopkins Nursing EBP Model. Data were then collated to synthesize and generate recommendations.RESULTS:Of the initial 613 unique articles, eight (two research and six quality improvement) were included. Six articles demonstrated improvements while two did not. Articles analyzed nursing documentation (n = 3), tasks or skills (n = 2), and best practice compliance (n = 3). One manuscript utilized an EHR-generated report; all others were completed by hand. Overall, there was not consistent and compelling evidence to support individualized audit and feedback report tools in nursing. However, several themes emerged related to sustainability, timing of feedback, audit, and feedback in the context of quality improvement, and the methods of acquiring and distributing data.LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION:The ubiquity and ease of the EHR make providing automated feedback to nurses tempting, yet it is not supported by the literature. More implementation science research is needed to explore audit and feedback reports in nursing. This article adds to the literature by highlighting a significant lack of consistent and compelling positive results from the well-established quality improvement strategy of audit and feedback in the nursing population. The absence of good data is as telling as its presence.

INTRODUCTION:The American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines recommend obtaining electrocardiography for patients who present to the emergency department with chest pain in less than 10 minutes of arrival. Reducing door-to-electrocardiography time is an important step in adhering to the recommended door-to-balloon times (≤ 90 minutes) for patients who present with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. METHODS:Based on lean sigma principles, a protocol was implemented in an adult emergency department that included deferring nurse triage for patients with complaints of chest pain, chest tightness, and chest pressure and providing them with a red heart symbol as an indicator for clinical technicians to prioritize their electrocardiography order. Pre- and postintervention data were collected over a 12-month period. RESULTS:Before the intervention, the mean door-to-electrocardiography time was 17 minutes for patients with chest pain (n = 893). After the intervention, the mean door-to-electrocardiography time for patients with chest pain significantly decreased to 7 minutes (n = 1,057) (t = 10.47, P ≤ 0.001). Initially, the percentage of compliance with door-to-electrocardiography standard of 10 minutes was 31% and improved to 83% after implementation of the new protocol. DISCUSSION:Implementation of the optimized door-to-electrocardiography protocol decreased the time for obtaining diagnostics and improved compliance with the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines, potentially decreasing door-to-balloon times for patients who presented with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

PROBLEM:Difficult venous access is a common problem in health care-especially in the emergency setting-that relies on quick diagnostics to differentiate patient acuities and administer critical medications. The creation of a dedicated team to address difficult venous access (DVA) is a possible solution to the problems of delayed venous access, yet no studies have been published on implementing such a team in the emergency department.METHODS:This was a quasi-experimental study in an urban emergency department. Researchers performed chart audits of staff-identified patients with DVA to gather baseline data. A DVA team was subsequently implemented 16 hours a day, 7 days a week. Data were recorded on patients referred to the team and included time, number of IV attempts, and patient characteristics.RESULTS:Baseline data were collected on 53 patients, and postintervention data included 135 patients. The implementation of a DVA team decreased the mean lab order-to-lab completion time by 115 minutes (P < 0.0001). Decreases in the number of attempts were not statistically significant. Patients requiring increased numbers of IV attempts also had many common characteristics including history of multiple attempts, poor skin quality, and IV drug use.DISCUSSION:The use of a dedicated team for DVA reduces the lag time from physician orders to actionable diagnostics or administration of medication. A dedicated DVA technician is a concrete solution to threats of patient safety, as well as ED crowding, and has the potential to affect both patient- and department-level care.

Conclusions: NEWS can capture acutely ill patients to some degree.Using inpatient admission as a proxy for acutely ill, residents with NEWS of 5 and above were more likely to require inpatient admission.However, as a tool on its own, it is limited in its scope to avert ED attendance.There were conditions with a NEWS score of 0-1 which still required ED visits for treatment and services such as suturing and radiological investigations which were not available in the nursing homes.NEWS alone is also a poor tool in recognizing conditions such as mild acute bleeding (NEWS score 0), stroke (NEWS score 0) and myocardial infarction (NEWS score 3).Out of the 13 residents who were discharged from the ED, 4 residents could have potentially been managed in the community; they were diagnosed with LRTI, functional decline, dehydration and simple laceration.Matching these conditions with relevant care paths would allow appropriate utilization of community resources and may avert ED attendance.Teleconsultation facilitated the aversion of 3 cases but was not employed in 15 cases despite clear instructions.Further study is needed to explore the nurses' clinical decisionmaking process in overriding the NEWSteleconsultation guidelines and transferring residents to the ED immediately, as well as a wider research into expanding the assessment tools used.Access to medical advice is vital for aversion of ED attendance whether by teleconsultation or GP attendance.Despite the limitations, NEWS is still useful as an initial assessment tool in a nursing home setting where nurses rely on clinical assessment and medical support is low.Supplemented with teleconsultation, NEWS can recognize acutely ill patients and avert ED attendance.

The American Heart Association/ American College of Cardiology guidelines recommend rapid door-to-electrocardiography (EKG) times for patients who present with chest pain. Reducing EKG-to-door time is important so that health care providers adhere to the recommended doorto-balloon times (≤ 90 minutes) for patients who present with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The objective of this quality improvement project was to meet the standard for EKG-to-door time of less than 10 minutes upon patients’ arrival to the emergency department (ED). Introduction

Study objective: Standards for emergency department (ED) triage in the United States rely heavily on subjective assessment and are limited in their ability to risk-stratify patients. This study seeks to evaluate an electronic triage system (e-triage) based on machine learning that predicts likelihood of acute outcomes enabling improved patient differentiation. Methods: A multisite, retrospective, cross-sectional study of 172,726 ED visits from urban and community EDs was conducted. E-triage is composed of a random forest model applied to triage data (vital signs, chief complaint, and active medical history) that predicts the need for critical care, an emergency procedure, and inpatient hospitalization in parallel and translates risk to triage level designations. Predicted outcomes and secondary outcomes of elevated troponin and lactate levels were evaluated and compared with the Emergency Severity Index (ESI). Results: E-triage predictions had an area under the curve ranging from 0.73 to 0.92 and demonstrated equivalent or improved identification of clinical patient outcomes compared with ESI at both EDs. E-triage provided rationale for risk based differentiation of the more than 65% of ED visits triaged to ESI level 3. Matching the ESI patient distribution for comparisons, e-triage identified more than 10% (14,326 patients) of ESI level 3 patients requiring up triage who had substantially increased risk of critical care or emergency procedure (1.7% ESI level 3 versus 6.2% up triaged) and hospitalization (18.9% versus 45.4%) across EDs. Conclusion: E-triage more accurately classifies ESI level 3 patients and highlights opportunities to use predictive analytics to support triage decisionmaking. Further prospective validation is needed.

Background Interruptions to nursing workload may contribute to procedural failures and clinical errors impacting quality/safety of care, but the impact of interruptions on the duration of these activities has not been closely scrutinised. This study analyses the effect of interruptions to care provided by nurses and clinical technicians on the length of clinical procedures and interventions (excluding the length of the interruption).Methods An observational time study of the effect of interruptions on common nursing interventions in the emergency department (ED) of a large academic medical centre was conducted. This study used direct observations of nurses and clinical technicians while delivering care to patients.Results The average time spent on an uninterrupted intervention was 296.47 s (median: 185.15, SD: 319.05), while interrupted interventions took 682.02 s (median: 589.63, SD: 504.59). Controlling for intervention type and other potential confounding factors using multiple linear regression found that interrupted interventions were 121.36 s (95% CI 79.57 to 163.15) longer, a 19 percentage point increase (95% CI 11.31 to 26.89), than an intervention without (excluding the length of the interruption). Family/patient interruptions effected duration the most while staff interruptions affected the intervention time the least.Discussion Our findings are consistent with outcomes of studies in non-healthcare domains, but are contrary to a study of ED physicians, suggesting differential responses to interruptions by physicians and nurses. Future studies on interruptions in healthcare should thus be discipline specific. Though the effect of interruptions on intervention length is only about 2 min, in an ED setting, this can increase patient risks and costs. To better focus efforts to reduce interruptions future research should focus on further separation of interruption type (eg, urgent vs routine or unnecessary).

STUDY OBJECTIVE:We measure the rate of emergency department (ED) specimen processing error reduction after implementation of an electronic physician order entry system paired with a bar-coded specimen labeling process. METHODS:A cohort pre- and postintervention study was conducted in the ED during a 61-month period ending September 2008 in a large urban teaching hospital. Historically, laboratory order and requisition processing was done by hand. Interventions included implementing an ED-specific electronic documentation and information system, which included physician order entry with patient verification through bar-coded wristbands and bar-coded specimen labels. The main outcome measure was processing error rate, defined as unlabeled/mislabeled/wrong patient specimen or requisition. Pre- and postimplementation data were tabulated monthly and compared in aggregate by χ(2) test. The contribution of ED error to total institution specimen error was also calculated. RESULTS:Of the 724,465 specimens collected preintervention, 3,007 (0.42%) were recorded as errors versus 379 errors (0.11%) of 334,039 specimens collected postintervention, which represents a 74% relative and 0.31% absolute decrease (95% confidence interval 0.28% to 0.32%). The proportion of institutional errors contributed by the ED was reduced from 20.4% to 11.4%, a 44% relative and 9.0% absolute reduction (95% confidence interval 7.7% to 10.3%). Subanalysis revealed that the majority of continued errors occur when the physician order entry/bar-code system could not be used (eg, blood bank or surgical pathology specimens). CONCLUSION:Combining an electronic physician order entry with bar-coded patient verification and electronic documentation and information system-generated specimen labels can significantly reduce ED specimen-related errors, with sizable influence on institutional specimen-related errors. Continued use of hand labeling and processing for special specimens appears inadvisable, though the cost-effectiveness of this intervention has not been established.