ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The management of acute gastrointestinal hemorrhage (GIH) is focused on early resuscitation through 2 large-bore intravenous (2LBIV) catheters, although adherence to this recommendation is low. LOCAL PROBLEM: Of 100 patients hospitalized with GIH in 2017, only 14 received 2LBIV access. The goal of this study was to improve this measure. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team used the DMAIC (define, measure, analyze, improve, and control) framework to perform a quality improvement initiative. INTERVENTIONS: The team used quality tools including a stakeholder survey, swimlane diagram, and fishbone diagram. The first intervention involved education of the hospitalists directing admissions, and the second intervention involved education of emergency department (ED) physicians and nurses regarding the importance of 2LBIV placement. RESULTS: Following the second intervention, there was a substantial increase in 2LBIV placement to 37 of 86 (43%). CONCLUSIONS: Carefully directed education of ED physicians and nurses with monthly feedback was effective in improving appropriate intravenous placement in patients with GIH.
Subject(s)
Administration, Intravenous , Catheters , Emergency Nursing/education , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , Internal Medicine/education , Physicians , Quality Improvement/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers , Acute Disease/therapy , Aged , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Female , Humans , Male , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the statistical measures of the performance of 2 interventions: a) early sepsis identification by a computerized sepsis "sniffer" algorithm (CSSA) in the emergency department (ED) and b) human decision to activate a multidisciplinary early resuscitation sepsis and shock response team (SSRT). METHODS: This study used a prospective and historical cohort study design to evaluate the performance of two interventions. INTERVENTION: A computerized sepsis sniffer algorithm (CSSA) to aid in early diagnosis and a multidisciplinary sepsis and shock response team (SSRT) to improve patient care by increasing compliance with Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) bundles. RESULTS: The CSSA yielded a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI, 99.13-100%) and a specificity of 96.2% (95% CI, 95.55-96.45%) to identifying sepsis in the ED (Table 1). The SSRT resource was activated appropriately in 34.1% (86/252) of patients meeting severe sepsis or septic shock criteria; the SSRT was inappropriately activated only three times in sepsis-only patients. In 53% (134/252) of cases meeting criteria for SSRT activation, the critical care team was consulted as opposed to activating the SSRT resource. CONCLUSION: Our two-step machine-human interface approach to patients with sepsis utilized an outstandingly sensitive and specific electronic tool followed by more specific human decision-making.
