Emergency department surge and overcrowding: An interdisciplinary solution for an institutional issue.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (27_suppl) ◽  
pp. 242-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Gaeta ◽  
Toni Edwards ◽  
Sorayah Bourenane ◽  
Carmen E. Gonzalez ◽  
Karen McFarland ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Contributing Factors ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Safety Risks ◽  
Ed Overcrowding ◽  
Systematic Solution ◽  
Md Anderson

242 Background: Emergency Department (ED) surges at MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) lead to overcrowding, safety risks, privacy concerns, staff burnout, and adverse events associated with delays in care, including death. In 2015, the ED Interdisciplinary Quality & Safety Committee (EDIQSC) at MDACC was developed to review and address safety events. We report on the preliminary results of a quality improvement project with a long-term goal of developing a systematic solution of proactively responding to ED surge and overcrowding (EDSO). Methods: First, EDIQSC reviewed the current literature regarding EDSO. Subsequently an ED Surge and ED Overcrowding Committee (EDSOC) was established to identify solutions to address patient safety risks and improve patient experience in the ED. Results: Literature review showed that NEDOCS (Weiss, SJ et al) was the best scoring tool to calculate ED Overcrowding levels. EDSOC’s weekly meetings facilitated by the Office of Performance Improvement (OPI) explored factors related to EDSO via FMEA a quality improvement tool that proactively evaluate process associated risks. In addition, the following immediate solutions were implemented in the ED: daily status reporting by ED to institutional leaders, a “fast-track” care area implementation, senior executive rounding during ED Surge, electronic medical record (EMR) configuration for high census accommodation, continuous ED Nursing Leadership unit needs assessment, and prioritization of needs based on hospital throughput. Additional interventions in current development include a real-time EMR dashboard accurately reflecting ED capacity, and a NEDOCS guided interdisciplinary operational action plan. Conclusions: ED Surge & Overcrowding is a complex issue with various external and internal contributing factors that cannot be solved with one approach. It is a dynamic, interdisciplinary system that requires vigilant planning, assessment of downstream change effects, stakeholder agility and continuous risk anticipation. EDSOC continues these efforts in an attempt to develop and implement a comprehensive, interdisciplinary tool to direct institutional operations during times of ED Surge & Overcrowding.

Use Of Prothrombin Complex Concentrates In Warfarin Anticoagulation Reversal In The Emergency Department: A Quality Improvement Study Of Administration Delays

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 4824-4824
Author(s):  
Simon Bordeleau ◽  
Daniele Marceau ◽  
Julien Poitras ◽  
Patrick Archambeault ◽  
Carolle Breton
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Blood Bank ◽  
Audit And Feedback ◽  
Chart Audit ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Administration Time ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Timely Administration

Introduction In some bleeding situations, quick reversal of warfarin anticoagulation is important. In the event of a major life-threatening bleeding event, the anticoagulation reversal delay can have an impact on mortality. This study aimed to improve the administration delay when using Prothrombin Complex Concentrate (PCC) for the emergent reversal of warfarin anticoagulation in the emergency department. Methods An audit and feedback quality improvement project was conducted in three phases: a retrospective audit phase, an analysis and feedback phase and prospective evaluation phase. The charts of all eligible patients in a single Emergency Department (ED) in Québec, Canada, who received 4-factor PCC since the introduction of this product in 2009 until October 31, 2011 were retrospectively audited with pre-planned evaluation criteria. The administration delay of PCC was calculated from the time of prescription to the time of administration. After this retrospective chart audit, we determined where improvements could be attained, gave feedback to the ED and the blood bank, and we created an action plan to ensure the timely administration of PCC. The action plan was then implemented in practice to reduce the administration delay. Finally, a six-month prospective evaluation study was conducted to determine if our action plan was followed and improved the administration delays. Results Seventy-seven charts were reviewed in the retrospective chart audit. The mean administration delay was 73.6 minutes (STD [34.1]) with a median of 70.0 minutes (25-75% IQR [45.0-95.0]). We found that this delay was principally due to the following barriers that prevented timely administration of PCCs: communication problems between the ED and the blood bank and reconstitution and delivery inefficiencies. In order to address these barriers, we developed an action plan that involved the following elements: a flowchart to remind all clinicians how to order PCCs and a new delivery method from the blood bank to the ED. During the 6 months following the implementation of our action plan, 39 patients received PCCs and the mean administration time decreased to 33.2 minutes (STD [14.2]) (p<.0001) with a median of 30.0 minutes (25-75% IQR [24.3-38.8]). Conclusion This audit and feedback quality improvement project involving the development and the implementation of an action plan comprising of a flowchart and a new delivery process reduced the administration time of PCC by more than half. Future studies to measure the impact of implementing a similar audit and feedback process involving an action plan in other centers should be conducted before this type of improvement process is implemented on wider scale. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals Quality improvement primer part 2: executing a quality improvement project in the emergency department

CJEM ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 532-538 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucas B. Chartier ◽  
Antonia S. Stang ◽  
Samuel Vaillancourt ◽  
Amy H. Y. Cheng
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Emergency Department ◽  
Emergency Medicine ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Emergency Department Setting ◽  
Pdsa Cycle ◽  
Time To Antibiotics ◽  
Final Article

ABSTRACTThe topics of quality improvement (QI) and patient safety have become important themes in health care in recent years, particularly in the emergency department setting, which is a frequent point of contact with the health care system for patients. In the first of three articles in this series meant as a QI primer for emergency medicine clinicians, we introduced the strategic planning required to develop an effective QI project using a fictional case study as an example. In this second article we continue with our example of improving time to antibiotics for patients with sepsis, and introduce the Model for Improvement. We will review what makes a good aim statement, the various categories of measures that can be tracked during a QI project, and the relative merits and challenges of potential change concepts and ideas. We will also present the Model for Improvement’s rapid-cycle change methodology, the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle. The final article in this series will focus on the evaluation and sustainability of QI projects.

IMPLEMENTATION OF A CLINICAL FRAILTY PATHWAY AT A CANCER CENTER: A QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. S24
Author(s):  
F. Gomes ◽  
K. Baker ◽  
J. Bruce ◽  
M. Eaton ◽  
J. Woods ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Quality Improvement Project ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Improvement Project

scholarly journals Oncology Fellow–Led Quality Improvement Project to Improve Rates of Palliative Care Utilization in Patients With Advanced Cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (8) ◽  
pp. e814-e822 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramy Sedhom ◽  
Arjun Gupta ◽  
Mirat Shah ◽  
Melinda Hsu ◽  
Marcus Messmer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Cancer ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Care Utilization ◽  
First Year ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Leadership Support ◽  
Ancillary Staff

PURPOSE: ASCO guidelines recommend palliative care (PC) referral for patients with advanced or metastatic cancer. Despite this, implementation has considerable hurdles. First-year oncology fellows at our institution identified low rates of PC utilization in their longitudinal clinic as a metric needing improvement. METHODS: A fellow-led multidisciplinary team aimed to increase PC utilization for patients with advanced cancer followed in he first-year fellows’ clinic from a baseline of 11.5% (5 of 43 patients, July to December of 2018) to 30% over a 6-month period. Utilization was defined as evaluation in the outpatient PC clinic hosted in the cancer center. The team identified the following barriers to referral: orders difficult to find in the electronic medical record (EMR), multiple consulting mechanisms (EMR, by phone, or in person), EMR request not activating formal consult, no centralized scheduler to contact or confirm appointment, and poor awareness of team structure. Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles were implemented based on identified opportunities. Data were obtained from the EMR. RESULTS: The first PDSA cycle included focus groups with stakeholders, standardizing referral process via single order set, identifying a single scheduler with bidirectional communication, and disseminating process changes. PDSA cycles were implemented from January to June of 2019. Rates of PC use increased from 11.5% before the intervention to 48.4% (48 of 99 patients) after the intervention. CONCLUSION: A multidisciplinary approach and classic quality improvement methodology improved PC use in patients with advanced cancer. The pilot succeeded given the small number of fellows, buy-in from stakeholders, and institutional and leadership support. Straightforward EMR interventions and ancillary staff use are effective in addressing underreferrals.

Delirium assessment in patients with advanced cancer presenting to the emergency department of a comprehensive cancer center.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (29_suppl) ◽  
pp. 217-217
Author(s):  
Ahmed F. Elsayem ◽  
Alan D. Valentine ◽  
Carla L. Warneke ◽  
Valda D Page ◽  
Eduardo Bruera ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Mortality Rate ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Emergency Departments ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Poor Survival ◽  
Delirium Assessment ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
Md Anderson

217 Background: The exact frequency of delirium among patients with advanced cancer presenting to emergency departments (EDs) is unknown. The purpose of this study is to determine the prevalence of delirium among patients with advanced cancer who present to the ED at MD Anderson Cancer Center. Methods: The exact frequency of delirium among patients with advanced cancer presenting to emergency departments (EDs) is unknown. The purpose of this study is to determine the prevalence of delirium among patients with advanced cancer who present to the ED at MD Anderson Cancer Center. Results: A total of 624 patients were screen for this study, and 243 patients were enrolled. The main reasons for exclusion were: 1) cancer was not advanced, 2) the patient had been in the ED for over 12 hours and 3) the patient was non-English speaking. The median age for all patients enrolled was 62 years (range 19 – 89 years), 167 (69%) were white, and 120(49.4) were female. CAM was positive in 22(9%) of patients. The median MDAS score of CAM positive patients was 14 (range 9 – 22 out of 30). Ten (10%)of 99 patients aged 65 and older were delirious as compared to 12 (8%) of 144 patients younger than 65 years (p = 0.6). Physician correctly predicted delirium in 13 patients (59%). Among the patients who were CAM positive 18 (82%) were admitted to the hospital as compared to 115 (52%) of patients without delirium (p = 0.012). Patients with delirium had higher hospital, and six months mortality rate. Conclusions: Delirium was identified in 9% of patients with advanced cancer visiting an ED, and is associated with more hospitalization and poor survival.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document