A Mobile, Electronic Health Record-Connected Application for Managing Team Workflows in Inpatient Care.

BACKGROUND: Clinical workflows require the ability to synthesize and act on existing and emerging patient information. While offering multiple benefits, in many circumstances electronic health records (EHRs) do not adequately support these needs. OBJECTIVES: We sought to design, build, and implement an EHR-connected rounding and handoff tool with real-time data that supports care plan organization and team-based care. This article first describes our process, from ideation and development through implementation; and second, the research findings of objective use, efficacy, and efficiency, along with qualitative assessments of user experience. METHODS: Guided by user-centered design and Agile development methodologies, our interdisciplinary team designed and built Carelign as a responsive web application, accessible from any mobile or desktop device, that gathers and integrates data from a health care institution's information systems. Implementation and iterative improvements spanned January to July 2016. We assessed acceptance via usage metrics, user observations, time-motion studies, and user surveys. RESULTS: By July 2016, Carelign was implemented on 152 of 169 total inpatient services across three hospitals staffing 1,616 hospital beds. Acceptance was near-immediate: in July 2016, 3,275 average unique weekly users generated 26,981 average weekly access sessions; these metrics remained steady over the following 4 years. In 2016 and 2018 surveys, users positively rated Carelign's workflow integration, support of clinical activities, and overall impact on work life. CONCLUSION: User-focused design, multidisciplinary development teams, and rapid iteration enabled creation, adoption, and sustained use of a patient-centered digital workflow tool that supports diverse users' and teams' evolving care plan organization needs.

Automated, electronic alerts for acute kidney injury: a single-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury often goes unrecognised in its early stages when effective treatment options might be available. We aimed to determine whether an automated electronic alert for acute kidney injury would reduce the severity of such injury and improve clinical outcomes in patients in hospital. METHODS: In this investigator-masked, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial, patients were recruited from the hospital of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, PA, USA. Eligible participants were adults aged 18 years or older who were in hospital with stage 1 or greater acute kidney injury as defined by Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes creatinine-based criteria. Exclusion criteria were initial hospital creatinine 4·0 mg/dL (to convert to µmol/L, multiply by 88·4) or greater, fewer than two creatinine values measured, inability to determine the covering provider, admission to hospice or the observation unit, previous randomisation, or end-stage renal disease. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequence to receive an acute kidney injury alert (a text-based alert sent to the covering provider and unit pharmacist indicating new acute kidney injury) or usual care, stratified by medical versus surgical admission and intensive care unit versus non-intensive care unit location in blocks of 4-8 participants. The primary outcome was a composite of relative maximum change in creatinine, dialysis, and death at 7 days after randomisation. All analyses were by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01862419. FINDINGS: Between Sept 17, 2013, and April 14, 2014, 23,664 patients were screened. 1201 eligible participants were assigned to the acute kidney injury alert group and 1192 were assigned to the usual care group. Composite relative maximum change in creatinine, dialysis, and death at 7 days did not differ between the alert group and the usual care group (p=0·88), or within any of the four randomisation strata (all p>0·05). At 7 days after randomisation, median maximum relative change in creatinine concentrations was 0·0% (IQR 0·0-18·4) in the alert group and 0·6% (0·0-17·5) in the usual care group (p=0·81); 87 (7·2%) patients in the alert group and 70 (5·9%) patients in usual care group had received dialysis (odds ratio 1·25 [95% CI 0·90-1·74]; p=0·18); and 71 (5·9%) patients in the alert group and 61 (5·1%) patients in the usual care group had died (1·16 [0·81-1·68]; p=0·40). INTERPRETATION: An electronic alert system for acute kidney injury did not improve clinical outcomes among patients in hospital. FUNDING: Penn Center for Healthcare Improvement and Patient Safety.

A trial of in-hospital, electronic alerts for acute kidney injury: design and rationale.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury is common in hospitalized patients, increases morbidity and mortality, and is under-recognized. To improve provider recognition, we previously developed an electronic alert system for acute kidney injury. To test the hypothesis that this electronic acute kidney injury alert could improve patient outcome, we designed a randomized controlled trial to test the effectiveness of this alert in hospitalized patients. The study design presented several methodologic, ethical, and statistical challenges. PURPOSE: To highlight the challenges faced and the solutions employed in the design and implementation of a clinical trial to determine whether the provision of an early electronic alert for acute kidney injury would improve outcomes in hospitalized patients. Challenges included how to randomize the delivery of the alert system and the ethical framework for waiving informed consent. Other methodologic challenges included the selection and statistical evaluation of our study outcome, a ranked-composite of a continuous covariate (creatinine) and two dichotomous outcomes (dialysis and death), and the use of the medical record as a source of trial data. METHODS: We have designed a randomized trial to assess the effectiveness of an electronic alert system for acute kidney injury. With broad inclusion criteria, and a waiver of informed consent, we enroll and randomize virtually every patient with acute kidney injury in our hospital. RESULTS: As of 31 March 2014, we have enrolled 2373 patients of 2400 targeted. Pre-alert data demonstrated a strong association between severity of acute kidney injury and inpatient mortality with a range of 6.4% in those with mild, stage 1 acute kidney injury, to 29% among those with stage 3 acute kidney injury (p < 0.001). We judged that informed consent would undermine the scientific validity of the study and present harms that are out of proportion to the very low risk intervention. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates the feasibility of designing an ethical randomized controlled trial of an early electronic alert for acute kidney injury without obtaining informed consent from individual participants. Our study outcome may serve as a model for other studies of acute kidney injury, insofar as our paradigm accounts for the effect that early death and dialysis have on assessment of acute kidney injury severity as defined by maximum achieved serum creatinine.

Performance of an automated electronic acute lung injury screening system in intensive care unit patients.

OBJECTIVE: Lung protective ventilation reduces mortality in patients with acute lung injury, but underrecognition of acute lung injury has limited its use. We recently validated an automated electronic acute lung injury surveillance system in patients with major trauma in a single intensive care unit. In this study, we assessed the system's performance as a prospective acute lung injury screening tool in a diverse population of intensive care unit patients. DESIGN: Patients were screened prospectively for acute lung injury over 21 wks by the automated system and by an experienced research coordinator who manually screened subjects for enrollment in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Clinical Trials Network (ARDSNet) trials. Performance of the automated system was assessed by comparing its results with the manual screening process. Discordant results were adjudicated blindly by two physician reviewers. In addition, a sensitivity analysis using a range of assumptions was conducted to better estimate the system's performance. SETTING: The Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, an academic medical center and ARDSNet center (1994-2006). PATIENTS: Intubated patients in medical and surgical intensive care units. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 1270 patients screened, 84 were identified with acute lung injury (incidence of 6.6%). The automated screening system had a sensitivity of 97.6% (95% confidence interval, 96.8-98.4%) and a specificity of 97.6% (95% confidence interval, 96.8-98.4%). The manual screening algorithm had a sensitivity of 57.1% (95% confidence interval, 54.5-59.8%) and a specificity of 99.7% (95% confidence interval, 99.4-100%). Sensitivity analysis demonstrated a range for sensitivity of 75.0-97.6% of the automated system under varying assumptions. Under all assumptions, the automated system demonstrated higher sensitivity than and comparable specificity to the manual screening method. CONCLUSIONS: An automated electronic system identified patients with acute lung injury with high sensitivity and specificity in diverse intensive care units of a large academic medical center. Further studies are needed to evaluate the effect of automated prompts that such a system can initiate on the use of lung protective ventilation in patients with acute lung injury.

Validation study of an automated electronic acute lung injury screening tool.

OBJECTIVE The authors designed an automated electronic system that incorporates data from multiple hospital information systems to screen for acute lung injury (ALI) in mechanically ventilated patients. The authors evaluated the accuracy of this system in diagnosing ALI in a cohort of patients with major trauma, but excluding patients with congestive heart failure (CHF). DESIGN Single-center validation study. Arterial blood gas (ABG) data and chest radiograph (CXR) reports for a cohort of intensive care unit (ICU) patients with major trauma but excluding patients with CHF were screened prospectively for ALI requiring intubation by an automated electronic system. The system was compared to a reference standard established through consensus of two blinded physician reviewers who independently screened the same population for ALI using all available ABG data and CXR images. The system's performance was evaluated (1) by measuring the sensitivity and overall accuracy, and (2) by measuring concordance with respect to the date of ALI identification (vs. reference standard). MEASUREMENTS One hundred ninety-nine trauma patients admitted to our level 1 trauma center with an initial injury severity score (ISS) >/= 16 were evaluated for development of ALI in the first five days in an ICU after trauma. Main RESULTS The system demonstrated 87% sensitivity (95% confidence interval [CI] 82.3-91.7) and 89% specificity (95% CI 84.7-93.4). It identified ALI before or within the 24-hour period during which ALI was identified by the two reviewers in 87% of cases. CONCLUSIONS An automated electronic system that screens intubated ICU trauma patients, excluding patients with CHF, for ALI based on CXR reports and results of ABGs is sufficiently accurate to identify many early cases of ALI.