Suppr超能文献

交叉覆盖文档:用于质量改进的评估工具的多中心开发

Cross-Cover Documentation: Multicenter Development of Assessment Tool for Quality Improvement.

作者信息

Heidemann Lauren A, Heidemann Danielle L, Huey Amanda, Dalton Melanie, Hartley Sarah

机构信息

Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.

Department of Internal Medicine, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan, USA.

出版信息

Teach Learn Med. 2019 Oct-Dec;31(5):519-527. doi: 10.1080/10401334.2019.1583567. Epub 2019 Mar 8.

Abstract

We aimed to develop an assessment tool to measure the quality of electronic health record inpatient documentation of cross-cover events. Cross-cover events occur in hospitalized patients when the primary team is absent. Documentation is critical for safe transitions of care. The quality of documentation for cross-cover events remains unknown, and no standardized tool exists for assessment. We created an assessment tool for cross-cover note quality with content validation based on input from 15 experts. We measured interrater reliability of the tool and scored cross-cover note quality for hospitalized patients with overnight rapid response team activation on internal medicine services at 2 academic hospitals for 1 year. Patients with a code blue or a clinically insignificant event were excluded. The presence of a note, writer identity (resident or faculty), time from rapid response to documentation, note content (subjective and objective information, diagnosis, and plan), and patient outcomes were compared. The instrument included 8 items to determine quality of cross-cover documentation: reason for physician notification, note written within 6 hours, subjective and objective patient information, diagnosis, treatment, level of care, and whether the attending physician was notified. The mean Cohen's kappa coefficient demonstrated good interrater agreement at 0.76. The instrument was scored in 222 patients with cross-cover notes. Notes documented by faculty scored higher in quality than residents (89% vs. 74% of 8 items present,  < .001). Cross-cover notes often lacked subjective information, diagnosis, and notification of attending, which was present in 60%, 62%, and 7% of notes, respectively. This study presents reliability evidence for an 8-item assessment tool to measure quality of documentation of cross-cover events and indicates improvement is needed for cross-cover education and safe transitions of care in acutely decompensating medical patients.

摘要

我们旨在开发一种评估工具,以衡量电子健康记录中住院患者跨科室交接事件文档的质量。当主诊团队不在时,住院患者会发生跨科室交接事件。文档记录对于安全的护理转接至关重要。跨科室交接事件的文档质量尚不清楚,且不存在用于评估的标准化工具。我们基于15位专家的意见创建了一种用于评估跨科室记录质量的工具,并进行了内容验证。我们测量了该工具的评分者间信度,并对两家学术医院内科服务中因夜间快速反应团队启动而住院的患者的跨科室记录质量进行了为期1年的评分。排除发生心脏骤停或临床意义不大事件的患者。比较了记录的存在情况、记录者身份(住院医师或教员)、从快速反应到记录的时间、记录内容(主观和客观信息、诊断及计划)以及患者结局。该工具包括8项内容,用于确定跨科室文档记录的质量:医生通知的原因、6小时内撰写的记录、患者的主观和客观信息、诊断、治疗、护理级别以及是否通知了主治医生。平均科恩kappa系数显示评分者间一致性良好,为0.76。对222份有跨科室记录的患者进行了评分。教员撰写的记录质量得分高于住院医师(8项内容中存在的比例分别为89%和74%,P<0.001)。跨科室记录往往缺乏主观信息、诊断以及对主治医生的通知,分别有60%、62%和7%的记录存在这些情况。本研究提供了一种8项评估工具用于衡量跨科室交接事件文档质量的可靠性证据,并表明在急性失代偿性内科患者的跨科室教育和安全护理转接方面需要改进。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验