Traumatic Stress and Depression Risk Screening at an ACS Verified Trauma Center.

BACKGROUND: Physiological trauma that requires admission to an emergency department may result in psychological distress. As many as 20%-40% of civilians who experience trauma develop traumatic stress disorders and depression postinjury. Yet, less than 10% of trauma centers implement screening for traumatic stress and depression risk. OBJECTIVE: This project aimed to develop, implement, and evaluate a traumatic stress and depression risk screening policy. METHODS: Twelve trauma advanced practice providers implemented the newly developed traumatic stress and depression risk screening policy at an American College of Surgeons verified Level II trauma center. Trauma patients admitted for greater than 24 hr, 14 years of age or older, with a Glasgow Coma Scale score greater than 13 were eligible for screening using the Injured Trauma Survivor Screen. RESULTS: During the 6-week data collection period, 114 trauma patients presented to the emergency department. Of those, 82 (72%) met inclusion criteria, 77 (94%) eligible trauma patients were screened, and seven (9%) patients screened positive. Patients not eligible for screening were discharged within 24 hr or were too confused to answer questions. An evaluation survey revealed that the advanced practice providers thought that the screening policy was easy to use, feasible, not very time-consuming, and should be continued in the future. CONCLUSION: This project demonstrated the ease and effectiveness of implementing a traumatic stress and depression risk screening policy and that only minor changes are needed to make it sustainable.

e-Prescribing in the Acute Care Setting: Determining the Educational and Motivational Needs of Healthcare Providers.

The study sought to determine the barriers to e-prescribing particular to the acute care setting, the educational and motivational needs of acute care providers, and the optimal process for incentive, education, and implementation of e-prescribing. A theoretically based survey instrument was adapted from previous work. Four domains were assessed: finesse, intent to use, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use. The survey was offered to a group of acute care providers. The educational and motivational needs of acute care providers are different from those in primary care. Perceived barriers centered on uncertain pharmacy hours, unconfirmed transmittal, and accidental transmission to wrong pharmacy. Healthcare providers with more self-assessed knowledge of e-prescribing are more likely to use e-prescribing. Providers with fewer years in practice seem to have greater knowledge of e-prescribing. Providing education and exposure to e-prescribing has the potential to decrease perception of barriers and increase perceived usefulness for acute care providers. Software redesign may be needed to remove barriers associated with uncertain pharmacy hours, controlled substance prescribing, transmittal confirmation, and bidirectional communication needs, thereby improving motivation to e-prescribe.

Can the use of urgent care clinics improve access to care without undermining continuity in primary care?

PURPOSE: There is a niche for urgent care clinics as an alternate source of health care in the United States. This systematic review examines whether the use of urgent care clinics can improve access to care or if these facilities undermine continuity of primary care. DATA SOURCES: Databases used were Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL) and Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE). Articles from 2004 to 2014 were searched using keywords-access, barriers, continuity of care, nurse practitioner (NP), urgent care, retail clinic, emergency, and primary care. CONCLUSIONS: Urgent care clinics can improve access to care, but may also negatively impact continuity of care, preventative services, and ongoing management of chronic conditions. Barriers to primary care and benefits of urgent care are inversely related. Insufficient knowledge regarding navigation of the healthcare system, perceived urgency of medical need, and deflection of care contribute to use of urgent care over primary care. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: NPs are frontline healthcare providers essential to developing and maintaining successful communication and collaboration among providers across healthcare settings. In both primary care and urgent care facilities, NPs can ensure continuity of care, decreased healthcare costs, and optimized health outcomes for patients.

The current state of e-prescribing: Implications for advanced practice registered nurses.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to review legislation, barriers and challenges, and current state of e-prescribing (eRx) in the United States. DATA SOURCES: Literature search of CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, and Google Scholar was performed. CONCLUSIONS: Challenges to eRx implementation and effective use include transcription, workflow issues, alert fatigue, educational and tangible reminders, and eRx of controlled substances. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Further research could be best focused on user-friendly and interactive software improvements for both patient and provider use, bidirectional communication, and workflow studies to improve efficiency of eRx.