Standardized Change-of-Shift Handoff: Nurses' Perspectives and Implications for Evidence-Based Practice.

BACKGROUND: Nursing handoff is a communication activity with a high risk for loss or omission of information. Efforts to improve handoffs include standardization of the processes and content of handoff communications. OBJECTIVES: To examine nurses' perspectives on the structure and organization of change-of-shift handoffs. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive approach was used to conduct a secondary analysis of focus group data. Thirty-four nurses from 4 critical care units participated in focus groups. RESULTS: Three themes emerged: handoff elements are defined by practice and culture; a clear, consistent, identified structure supports handoff; and personal preferences can disrupt handoff. CONCLUSIONS: A standardized approach to handoff based on unit and organizational needs will be more successful than a broad mandate of content and organization. Individual preference is prevalent and strongly influences the information conveyed and the structure of handoff communication.

Change-of-Shift Nursing Handoff Interruptions: Implications for Evidence-Based Practice.

BACKGROUND: The importance of change-of-shift handoffs in maintaining patient safety has been well demonstrated. Change-of-shift handoff is an important source of data used in surveillance, a nursing intervention aimed at identifying and preventing complications. Surveillance requires the nurse to acquire, process, and synthesize information (cues) encountered during patient care. Interruptions in handoff have been observed but there is a gap in the evidence concerning how interruptions during nurse-to-nurse handoff impact the change-of-shift handoff process. AIMS: To describe registered nurses' perceptions of interruptions experienced during change-of-shift handoff at the bedside in critical care units and analyze the number, type, and source of interruptions during change-of-shift handoff at the bedside. METHODS: An exploratory descriptive design was used. One hundred nurse-to-nurse handoffs were observed, and four focus groups were conducted. Observation data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and quantitative content analysis. Focus group data were analyzed with qualitative content analysis. RESULTS AND FINDINGS: Of the 1,196 interruptions observed, 800 occurred in the communication between the two nurses involved in the handoff. Over 80% (645) of these interruptions were from the nurse receiving handoff and included questions or clarification of information received. About half of the nurses reported that interruptions occurred during handoff. Focus group findings revealed that whether or not something is an interruption is determined by the individual nurse's appraisal of value added to their knowledge of the patient and/or plan of care at the time of handoff. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: Interruptions during handoff are evaluated as useful or disruptive based on the value to the nurse at the time. Strict structuring or mandating of handoff elements may limit nurses' ability to communicate information deemed most relevant to the care of a specific unique patient.

Therapeutic hypothermia for out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation survivors: a feasibility study comparing time to achieve target core temperature using conventional conductive cooling versus combined conductive plus pericranial convective cooling.

OBJECTIVE: Mild to moderate therapeutic hypothermia (TH) has been shown to improve survival and neurologic outcome, as well as to reduce healthcare costs in patients resuscitated from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) with ventricular fibrillation. Accordingly, the American Heart Association has categorized this as a Class IB intervention. The therapeutic window for initiating TH is narrow, and thus, achieving target temperature expeditiously is of paramount importance to improve postresuscitative neurologic outcome. The present investigation is a feasibility study designed to assess the practicality and efficacy of including pericranial cooling in our postresuscitative TH protocol. Specifically, we compared time required to achieve target temperature (33°C) using our present standard of TH care (ie, conductive body cooling, conventional TH group) versus combined conductive body cooling plus convective (forced-air) head and neck cooling (combined TH group). DESIGN: Adult patients who experienced OHCA were included in the study provided TH could be initiated within 4 hours of resuscitation from ventricular fibrillation. Patients enrolled in both groups were cooled using the servo-controlled Arctic Sun conductive cooling system (Medivance, Inc, Louisville, CO). However, patients enrolled in the combined TH group also received forced-air pericranial cooling with an ambient temperature of approximately 13°C. In all cases, the target core (bladder) temperature was 33°C. The primary endpoint (ie, time required to achieve a core temperature of 33°C) was analyzed as a continuous variable and compared between groups using the rank sum test, whereas categorical variables were compared between groups using the chi-square test. SETTING: Cardiac intensive care unit at a major tertiary care teaching center in Rochester, MN. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients who experienced OHCA were included in the study. INTERVENTIONS: Patients enrolled in both groups were cooled using the servo-controlled Arctic Sun conductive cooling system (Medivance, Inc, Louisville, CO). However, patients enrolled in the combined TH group also received forced-air pericranial cooling with an ambient temperature of approximately 13°C. MEASUREMENTS: Only patients admitted after January 1, 2008, were included in the analysis (28 combined TH group patients v 55 conventional TH group patients). Demographic data were similar between groups. When compared with the conventional TH group, time to achieve 33°C was significantly shorter in the combined TH group: 207 minutes (173 and 286 min) [median (25th, 75th percentile)] v 181 minutes (63 and 247 min). The magnitude and frequency of hypothermia-mediated physiologic perturbations (eg, hypokalemia) were similar for both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both TH cooling paradigms effectively achieved 33°C; however, the combined TH technique significantly decreased the time required to achieve the target temperature. Although not evaluated in this study, such an effect may further improve postresuscitative neurologic outcomes beyond that previously described using conventional TH. Although a positive result (ie, abbreviated time taken to achieve target temperature) was observed, we maintain guarded enthusiasm for this evolving adjunctive technique until corroborative outcome-based evidence is available.

Honouring patient's resuscitation wishes: a multiphased effort to improve identification and documentation.

BACKGROUND: Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) orders are intended to safeguard patients' autonomy and prevent unwanted resuscitative care. However, DNR orders may be miscommunicated between health care providers, leading to errors honoring patient wishes during cardiac arrest events. This project focused on improving accuracy of DNR ordering processes for an academic, tertiary care hospital. INTERVENTION: We describe a performance improvement process and outcomes for implementation of an inpatient electronic ordering system that included an automated, decentralized printing process for resuscitation status armbands. Specific phases of this project involved: (a) identification of common factors contributing to errors honoring patients' resuscitation wishes, (b) design of an electronic ordering process, (c) design and integration of a new DNR armband and (d) evaluation of the impact of changes on communication accuracy. The primary outcome was percentage of patients with incorrect designation of resuscitation status on armbands compared to the active resuscitation order in the electronic medical record. RESULTS: After implementation of an electronic ordering process we identified that 37/196 (19%) patients had an armband that did not reflect their documented wishes versus 2/103 (2%) after integration of automated armband printing into the process (p<0.001). No armband discrepancies were found after the first two weeks of post-implementation audits. CONCLUSIONS: Design and implementation of an electronic ordering and armband labeling process reduced discrepancies between patient wishes and the armband labeling of the patient's desired DNR status. It is anticipated that these improvements will reduce the risk of adverse outcomes, and better align clinical processes with patient wishes.

Lack of association between worsening renal function and mortality in heart failure patients treated with nesiritide.

BACKGROUND: Nesiritide is approved for the treatment of decompensated heart failure. Because nesiritide may exacerbate renal dysfunction, it has been claimed that there may be a link between worsening renal function caused by nesiritide and increased mortality. AIMS: We analyzed our inpatient experience with nesiritide to determine if changes in renal function were associated with worsened mortality. METHODS AND RESULTS: A retrospective study of 167 patients [65% male, median age 70 years, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 30%, glomerular filtration rate (GFR) 36 mL/min/1.73 m(2), serum creatinine (sCr)1.8 mg/dL] treated with standard dose nesiritide was undertaken for the period September 2001-March 2005. Mortality was 12.5% at 1 month and 51% at 24 months (median follow-up was 5.4 months [interquartile ranges (IQR) 1.3, 18.6]. Higher mortality was associated with lower pre-infusion GFR (hazard ratio for a 10 mL/min/1.72 m(2) decrease=1.22, p=0.004). Pre-to-post nesiritide changes in GFR (median 0.0, IQR-5.8, 8.4; p=0.51) and creatinine (median 0.0, IQR -0.3, 0.3; p=0.91), however, were not significant and not detected to be associated with worsened mortality by Cox proportional hazards (p=0.46 and p=0.40, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: While we found that nesiritide infusion in decompensated heart failure patients worsened renal function (decrease in GFR) in 29% of patients, changes in renal function could not be related to an incremental worsening of mortality. Our findings do not support an association of worsening renal function and worsening mortality after nesiritide.

Comparison of a nurse initiated insulin infusion protocol for intensive insulin therapy between adult surgical trauma, medical and coronary care intensive care patients.

BACKGROUND: Sustained hyperglycemia is a known risk factor for adverse outcomes in critically ill patients. The specific aim was to determine if a nurse initiated insulin infusion protocol (IIP) was effective in maintaining blood glucose values (BG) within a target goal of 100-150 mg/dL across different intensive care units (ICUs) and to describe glycemic control during the 48 hours after protocol discontinuation. METHODS: A descriptive, retrospective review of 366 patients having 28,192 blood glucose values in three intensive care units, Surgical Trauma Intensive Care Unit (STICU), Medical (MICU) and Coronary Care Unit (CCU) in a quaternary care hospital was conducted. Patients were > 15 years of age, admitted to STICU (n = 162), MICU (n = 110) or CCU (n = 94) over 8 months; October 2003-June 2004 and who had an initial blood glucose level > 150 mg/dL. We summarized the effectiveness and safety of a nurse initiated IIP, and compared these endpoints among STICU, MICU and CCU patients. RESULTS: The median blood glucose values (mg/dL) at initiation of insulin infusion protocol were lower in STICU (188; IQR, 162-217) than in MICU, (201; IQR, 170-268) and CCU (227; IQR, 178-313); p < 0.0001. Mean time to achieving a target glucose level (100-150 mg/dL) was similar between the three units: 4.6 hours in STICU, 4.7 hours in MICU and 4.9 hours in CCU (p = 0.27). Hypoglycemia (BG < 60 mg/dL) occurred in 7% of STICU, 5% of MICU, and 5% of CCU patients (p = 0.85). Protocol violations were uncommon in all three ICUs. Mean blood glucose 48 hours following IIP discontinuation was significantly different for each population: 142 mg/dL in STICU, 167 mg/dL in MICU, and 160 mg/dL in CCU (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The safety and effectiveness of nurse initiated IIP was similar across different ICUs in our hospital. Marked variability in glucose control after the protocol discontinuation suggests the need for further research regarding glucose control in patients transitioning out of the ICU.

Effects of standard heart failure therapy and concomitant treatment with intravenous furosemide or inotropes (dobutamine, dopamine, and/or milrinone) on renal function and mortality in patients treated with nesiritide.

The safety and efficacy of the concomitant use of intravenous diuretics and positive inotropes with nesiritide have not been well studied. There is also a paucity of data examining whether the type of medical therapy before treatment with nesiritide has an effect on outcomes. Data from 167 patients with heart failure and reduced left ventricular ejection fractions (34 +/- 17%) treated with nesiritide were analyzed retrospectively. Baseline oral medications were continued, diuretic regimens were modified, and nitrates were discontinued. Forty-three patients (26%) received intravenous furosemide with nesiritide. The glomerular filtration rate before and after nesiritide infusion was not different in patients treated with versus without furosemide (0.7 +/- 8.8 vs 0.7 +/- 11.0 ml/min/1.73 m(2), p = 0.71). Change in urine output from before to during nesiritide infusion was greater with concomitant furosemide (41 +/- 57 vs 10 +/- 58 m/hour, p = 0.006). There was no significant difference in survival with furosemide (90% vs 89% at 30 days, 62% vs 57% at 12 months, p = 0.63). Thirty-nine patients (23%) received inotrope support with nesiritide. The glomerular filtration rate tended to improve when inotropes were used with nesiritide (3.3 +/- 13.1 vs -0.1 +/- 9.4, ml/min/1.73 m(2), p = 0.17). No significant changes in serum creatinine or urine output were observed with inotrope use. Survival was not worsened in those receiving inotropes (p = 0.51). Also, there were no significant differences in serum creatinine, glomerular filtration rate, or urine output in patients who continued to receive angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, beta blockers, or digoxin therapy during nesiritide infusion. In conclusion, there were no observed adverse affects of baseline medical therapy, intravenous diuretics, or intravenous inotropes on renal functions or mortality when used in conjunction with nesiritide in the treatment of decompensated chronic heart failure.