scholarly journals TP6.2.2 Multi-disciplinary interventions to increase utilisation of NELA scores and critical care involvement following emergency colorectal surgery

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Smith ◽  
Katherine Hodge ◽  
Andrew Ying ◽  
Rebecca Swan ◽  
Alexander Von Maydell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Colorectal Surgery ◽  
Emergency Laparotomy ◽  
Patient Records ◽  
Electronic Patient Records ◽  
Theatre Staff ◽  
Audit Cycle ◽  
Emergency Colorectal Surgery ◽  
Initial Cycle

Abstract Aims This audit aimed to assess pre-operative NELA risk score documentation and subsequent specialist peri-operative critical care involvement. Methods This complete audit cycle retrospectively reviewed notes (electronic patient records, anaesthetic charts and CEPOD booking forms) of all patients undergoing emergency laparotomy between March and May 2019. The NELA score was calculated retrospectively if not documented. Following the initial audit, the following multi-disciplinary interventions were instituted: alteration of the physical CEPOD booking form to include NELA score (Surgical); a sticker added to anaesthetic charts to prompt NELA calculation (Anaesthetic), formal recording of NELA score during theatre brief (Theatre staff); and by increasing awareness of NELA via departmental education (All). The audit cycle was completed by reassessment between October and November 2020. Results The initial cycle included 34 patients, with only 2 (6%) having a NELA documented. The repeat cycle included 35 patients, with 29 (83%) having a NELA documented. Regarding post-operative critical care admissions, both cycles found that 100% of patients with a NELA of ≥ 5%, were admitted to either surgical HDU or ICU (n = 17 in first cycle, n = 17 in second cycle). For those with a high-risk NELA of ≥ 10% (n = 11 in first cycle, n = 7 in second cycle), only 2 (18%) were admitted to ICU in the first cycle vs 7 (100%) in the second cycle. Conclusions This complete audit cycle demonstrates improved NELA score calculation following institution of several multidisciplinary interventions. The improved NELA score uptake was associated with increased critical care review and admission to ITU in high-risk cases.

scholarly journals Pre-NELA vs NELA – has anything changed, or is it just an audit exercise?

2016 ◽  
Vol 98 (8) ◽  
pp. 554-559 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Mak ◽  
AR Hakeem ◽  
V Chitre
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Uneventful Recovery ◽  
Emergency Laparotomy ◽  
Mortality And Morbidity ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Possum Score ◽  
Operative Severity Score ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Set Up

BACKGROUND Following evidence suggestive of high mortality following emergency laparotomies, the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) was set up, highlighting key standards in emergency service provision. Our aim was to compare our NHS trust’s adherence to these recommendations immediately prior to, and following, the launch of NELA, and to compare patient outcome. METHODS This was a retrospective study of patients who underwent an emergency laparotomy over the course of 6 months – 3 months either side of the initiation of NELA. RESULTS There were 44 patients before the initiation of NELA (pre-NELA, PN group) and 55 in the first 3 months of NELA (N group). We saw a significant increase in the proportion of patients whose decision to operate was made by the consultant: 75.0% in the PN group vs 100% in N group (subsequent data presented in this order) (P < 0.001). The presence of a consultant surgeon (75.0% vs 83.6%, P = 0.321) and anaesthetist (100.0% vs 90.9%, P = 0.064) in theatres were comparable in both groups. Risk stratification based on Portsmouth Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality and Morbidity (P-POSSUM) score showed no difference in high-risk patients in both groups (47.7% vs 36.4%, P = 0.306). With the NELA initiative, however, significantly more patients were admitted directly from theatres to the critical care unit, when compared with the pre-NELA period (9.1% vs 27.3%, P = 0.038). This also reflected a significant reduction in unexpected escalation to a higher level of care during this period (10.0% vs 0%, P = 0.036). Significantly more patients had uneventful recovery in the NELA period (52.3 vs 76.4%, P = 0.018), although there was no difference in 30-day mortality between the groups (2.3% vs 7.3%, P = 0.378). CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrated a greater degree of consultant involvement in the decision to operate during NELA. More high-risk patients have been identified preoperatively with diligent risk assessment and, hence, have been proactively admitted to critical care units following laparotomy, which may account for the significant reduction in unexpected escalation to level 2 or level 3 care and thus in overall better patient outcomes.

scholarly journals EP.FRI.763 Impact of COVID-19 on the rates of emergency laparotomies at an acute general hospital in the United Kingdom

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Curtis Wright ◽  
Simon Kirkham ◽  
Alex Millward ◽  
Robert MacAdam
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Emergency Laparotomy ◽  
Single Centre ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Uk ◽  
National Emergency

Abstract Aims The aim of this study was to analyse if the COVID-19 pandemic had any effect on the number of emergency laparotomies performed each month at a single NHS Foundation Trust. Methods This single-centre retrospective observational study included all patients that underwent an emergency laparotomy that was registered as part of the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) at Whiston Hospital in Merseyside, UK, between January 2019 and October 2020. The rates recorded throughout March and April 2020 (COVID) were then compared to the preceding 12 months until the first COVID death was recorded in the UK on March 5th, and the 6 months following the initial national lockdown. Results The number of emergency laparotomies performed each month declined from an average of 14.7 (95% CI 13.2 – 16.1) in the preceding 12 months to 5 during COVID (95% CI 5 – 5); a decrease of 65.9%. Following the easing of lockdown rules in early May, this decline was partly reversed with an average of 9.7 (95% CI 8.9 – 10.5) performed each month until October 2020, reflecting a 34.1% reduction from the pre-COVID baseline. The percentage of patients that achieved the NELA best practice tariffs also fell during COVID to 71% from an average of 79.3% (95% CI 76.0 – 82.7) due to fewer high risk laparotomies being admitted to Critical Care post-operatively. Conclusions During the COVID-19 pandemic, emergency laparotomy rates fell and have only partially recovered to pre-pandemic rates. Post-operative admission to critical care for high risk laparotomies also declined during this period. 

Electronic Patient Records in Medical Practice: A Multidisciplinary Endeavor

1999 ◽  
Vol 38 (04/05) ◽  
pp. 287-288 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. van der Lei ◽  
P. W. Moorman ◽  
M. A. Musen
Keyword(s):  
Medical Practice ◽  
Patient Records ◽  
Electronic Patient Records

Postmarketing Surveillance Based on Electronic Patient Records: The IPCI Project

1999 ◽  
Vol 38 (04/05) ◽  
pp. 339-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. van der Lei ◽  
B. M. Th. Mosseveld ◽  
M. A. M. van Wijk ◽  
P. D. van der Linden ◽  
M. C. J. M. Sturkenboom ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Practitioner ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Validation Studies ◽  
Resource Planning ◽  
Routine Practice ◽  
Patient Records ◽  
Postmarketing Surveillance ◽  
Electronic Patient Records ◽  
Use Of Data ◽  
Data Requirements

AbstractResearchers claim that data in electronic patient records can be used for a variety of purposes including individual patient care, management, and resource planning for scientific research. Our objective in the project Integrated Primary Care Information (IPCI) was to assess whether the electronic patient records of Dutch general practitioners contain sufficient data to perform studies in the area of postmarketing surveillance studies. We determined the data requirements for postmarketing surveil-lance studies, implemented additional software in the electronic patient records of the general practitioner, developed an organization to monitor the use of data, and performed validation studies to test the quality of the data. Analysis of the data requirements showed that additional software had to be installed to collect data that is not recorded in routine practice. To avoid having to obtain informed consent from each enrolled patient, we developed IPCI as a semianonymous system: both patients and participating general practitioners are anonymous for the researchers. Under specific circumstances, the researcher can contact indirectly (through a trusted third party) the physician that made the data available. Only the treating general practitioner is able to decode the identity of his patients. A Board of Supervisors predominantly consisting of participating general practitioners monitors the use of data. Validation studies show the data can be used for postmarketing surveillance. With additional software to collect data not normally recorded in routine practice, data from electronic patient record of general practitioners can be used for postmarketing surveillance.

scholarly journals Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Emergency Laparotomy Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations: Part 1—Preoperative: Diagnosis, Rapid Assessment and Optimization

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol J. Peden ◽  
Geeta Aggarwal ◽  
Robert J. Aitken ◽  
Iain D. Anderson ◽  
Nicolai Bang Foss ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
English Language ◽  
Enhanced Recovery ◽  
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery ◽  
Preoperative Care ◽  
Surgical Patient ◽  
Emergency Laparotomy ◽  
Emergency General Surgery ◽  
Optimal Care ◽  
Level Of Evidence

Abstract Background Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols reduce length of stay, complications and costs for a large number of elective surgical procedures. A similar, structured approach appears to improve outcomes, including mortality, for patients undergoing high-risk emergency general surgery, and specifically emergency laparotomy. These are the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of these patients using an ERAS approach. Methods Experts in aspects of management of the high-risk and emergency general surgical patient were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. Pubmed, Cochrane, Embase, and MEDLINE database searches on English language publications were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies on each item were selected with particular attention to randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and large cohort studies, and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on non-emergency patients when appropriate. The Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. The guideline has been divided into two parts: Part 1—Preoperative Care and Part 2—Intraoperative and Postoperative management. This paper provides guidelines for Part 1. Results Twelve components of preoperative care were considered. Consensus was reached after three rounds. Conclusions These guidelines are based on the best available evidence for an ERAS approach to patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. Initial management is particularly important for patients with sepsis and physiological derangement. These guidelines should be used to improve outcomes for these high-risk patients.

scholarly journals Electronic patient record and its effects on social aspects of interprofessional collaboration and clinical workflows in hospitals (eCoCo): a mixed methods study protocol

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Beckmann ◽  
Kerstin Dittmer ◽  
Julia Jaschke ◽  
Ute Karbach ◽  
Juliane Köberlein-Neu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Social Research ◽  
Interprofessional Collaboration ◽  
Participant Observation ◽  
Patient Records ◽  
Electronic Patient Records ◽  
Daily Work ◽  
Network Analyses

Abstract Background The need for and usage of electronic patient records within hospitals has steadily increased over the last decade for economic reasons as well as the proceeding digitalization. While there are numerous benefits from this system, the potential risks of using electronic patient records for hospitals, patients and healthcare professionals must also be discussed. There is a lack in research, particularly regarding effects on healthcare professionals and their daily work in health services. The study eCoCo aims to gain insight into changes in interprofessional collaboration and clinical workflows resulting from introducing electronic patient records. Methods eCoCo is a multi-center case study integrating mixed methods from qualitative and quantitative social research. The case studies include three hospitals that undergo the process of introducing electronic patient records. Data are collected before and after the introduction of electronic patient records using participant observation, interviews, focus groups, time measurement, patient and employee questionnaires and a questionnaire to measure the level of digitalization. Furthermore, documents (patient records) as well as structural and administrative data are gathered. To analyze the interprofessional collaboration qualitative network analyses, reconstructive-hermeneutic analyses and document analyses are conducted. The workflow analyses, patient and employee assessment analyses and classification within the clinical adoption meta-model are conducted to provide insights into clinical workflows. Discussion This study will be the first to investigate the effects of introducing electronic patient records on interprofessional collaboration and clinical workflows from the perspective of healthcare professionals. Thereby, it will consider patients’ safety, legal and ethical concerns and quality of care. The results will help to understand the organization and thereby improve the performance of health services working with electronic patient records. Trial registration The study was registered at the German clinical trials register (DRKS00023343, Pre-Results) on November 17, 2020.

scholarly journals Impact of Critical Care Consultation Requests for Avoidable Central Venous Catheters on Medical-Surgical Units

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s258-s258
Author(s):  
Madhuri Tirumandas ◽  
Theresa Madaline ◽  
Gregory David Weston ◽  
Ruchika Jain ◽  
Jamie Figueredo
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Retrospective Chart Review ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Central Venous Catheters ◽  
High Risk Population ◽  
Central Venous

Background: Although central-line–associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) in US hospitals have improved in the last decade, ~30,100 CLABSIs occur annually.1,2 Central venous catheters (CVC) carry a high risk of infections and should be limited to appropriate clinical indications.6,7 Montefiore Medical Center, a large, urban, academic medical center in the Bronx, serves a high-risk population with multiple comobidities.8–11 Despite this, the critical care medicine (CCM) team is often consulted to place a CVC when a peripheral intravenous line (PIV) cannot be obtained by nurses or primary providers. We evaluated the volume of CCM consultation requests for avoidable CVCs and related CLABSIs. Methods: Retrospective chart review was performed for patients with CCM consultation requests for CVC placement between July and October 2019. The indication for CVC, type of catheter inserted or recommended, and NHSN data were used to identify CLABSIs. CVCs were considered avoidable if a PIV was used for the stated indication and duration of therapy, with no anatomical contraindications to PIV in nonemergencies, according to the Michigan Appropriateness Guide for Intravenous Catheters (MAGIC).6Results: Of 229 total CCM consults, 4 (18%) requests were for CVC placement; 21 consultations (9%) were requested for avoidable CVCs. Of 40 CVC requests, 18 (45%) resulted in CVC placement by the CCM team, 4 (10%) were deferred for nonurgent PICC by interventional radiology, and 18 (45%) were deferred in favor of PIV or no IV. Indications for CVC insertion included emergent chemotherapy (n = 8, 44%) and dialysis (n = 3, 16%), vasopressors (n = 3, 16%), antibiotics (n = 2, 11%) and blood transfusion (n = 2, 11%). Of 18 CVCs, 9 (50%) were potentially avoidable: 2 short-term antibiotics and rest for nonemergent indications; 2 blood transfusions, 1 dialysis, 2 chemotherapy and 2 vasopressors. Between July and October 2019, 6 CLABSIs occurred in CVCs placed by the CCM team; in 3 of 6 CLABSI events (50%), the CVC was avoidable. Conclusions: More than half of consultation requests to the CCM team for CVCs are avoidable, and they disproportionately contribute to CLABSI events. Alternatives for intravenous access could potentially avoid 9% of CCM consultations and 50% of CLABSIs in CCM-inserted CVCs on medical-surgical wards.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

scholarly journals Using electronic patient records to assess the effect of a complex antenatal intervention in a cluster randomised controlled trial—data management experience from the DESiGN Trial team

Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Relph ◽  
◽  
Maria Elstad ◽  
Bolaji Coker ◽  
Matias C. Vieira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Data Quality ◽  
Data Management ◽  
Randomised Control Trial ◽  
Data Dictionary ◽  
Patient Records ◽  
Electronic Patient Records ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
Quality Checks ◽  
Data Harmonisation

Abstract Background The use of electronic patient records for assessing outcomes in clinical trials is a methodological strategy intended to drive faster and more cost-efficient acquisition of results. The aim of this manuscript was to outline the data collection and management considerations of a maternity and perinatal clinical trial using data from electronic patient records, exemplifying the DESiGN Trial as a case study. Methods The DESiGN Trial is a cluster randomised control trial assessing the effect of a complex intervention versus standard care for identifying small for gestational age foetuses. Data on maternal/perinatal characteristics and outcomes including infants admitted to neonatal care, parameters from foetal ultrasound and details of hospital activity for health-economic evaluation were collected at two time points from four types of electronic patient records held in 22 different electronic record systems at the 13 research clusters. Data were pseudonymised on site using a bespoke Microsoft Excel macro and securely transferred to the central data store. Data quality checks were undertaken. Rules for data harmonisation of the raw data were developed and a data dictionary produced, along with rules and assumptions for data linkage of the datasets. The dictionary included descriptions of the rationale and assumptions for data harmonisation and quality checks. Results Data were collected on 182,052 babies from 178,350 pregnancies in 165,397 unique women. Data availability and completeness varied across research sites; each of eight variables which were key to calculation of the primary outcome were completely missing in median 3 (range 1–4) clusters at the time of the first data download. This improved by the second data download following clarification of instructions to the research sites (each of the eight key variables were completely missing in median 1 (range 0–1) cluster at the second time point). Common data management challenges were harmonising a single variable from multiple sources and categorising free-text data, solutions were developed for this trial. Conclusions Conduct of clinical trials which use electronic patient records for the assessment of outcomes can be time and cost-effective but still requires appropriate time and resources to maximise data quality. A difficulty for pregnancy and perinatal research in the UK is the wide variety of different systems used to collect patient data across maternity units. In this manuscript, we describe how we managed this and provide a detailed data dictionary covering the harmonisation of variable names and values that will be helpful for other researchers working with these data. Trial registration Primary registry and trial identifying number: ISRCTN 67698474. Registered on 02/11/16.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document