BackgroundPatient falls are a major problem in hospitals. The development of a Patient-Centered Fall Prevention Toolkit, Fall TIPS (Tailoring Interventions for Patient Safety), reduced falls by 25% in acute care hospitals by leveraging health information technology to complete the 3-step fall prevention process—(1) conduct fall risk assessments; (2) develop tailored fall prevention plans with the evidence-based interventions; and (3) consistently implement the plan. We learned that Fall TIPS was most effective when patients and family were engaged in all 3 steps of the fall prevention process. Over the past decade, our team developed 3 Fall TIPS modalities—the original electronic health record (EHR) version, a laminated paper version that uses color to provide clinical decision support linking patient-specific risk factors to the interventions, and a bedside display version that automatically populates the bedside monitor with the patients’ fall prevention plan based on the clinical documentation in the EHR. However, the relative effectiveness of each Fall TIPS modality for engaging patients and family in the 3-step fall prevention process remains unknown.ObjectiveThis study aims to examine if the Fall TIPS modality impacts patient engagement in the 3-step fall prevention process and thus Fall TIPS efficacy.MethodsTo assess patient engagement in the 3-step fall prevention process, we conducted random audits with the question, “Does the patient/family member know their fall prevention plan?” In addition, audits were conducted to measure adherence, defined by the presence of the Fall TIPS poster at the bedside. Champions from 3 hospitals reported data from April to June 2017 on 6 neurology and 7 medical units. Peer-to-peer feedback to reiterate the best practice for patient engagement was central to data collection.ResultsOverall, 1209 audits were submitted for the patient engagement measure and 1401 for the presence of the Fall TIPS poster at the bedside. All units reached 80% adherence for both measures. While some units maintained high levels of patient engagement and adherence with the poster protocol, others showed improvement over time, reaching clinically significant adherence (>80%) by the final month of data collection.ConclusionsEach Fall TIPS modality effectively facilitates patient engagement in the 3-step fall prevention process, suggesting all 3 can be used to integrate evidence-based fall prevention practices into the clinical workflow. The 3 Fall TIPS modalities may prove an effective strategy for the spread, allowing diverse institutions to choose the modality that fits with the organizational culture and health information technology infrastructure.

BackgroundMelanoma vaccines have not been optimized. Adjuvants are added to activate dendritic cells (DCs) and to induce a favourable immunologic milieu, however, little is known about their cellular and molecular effects in human skin. We hypothesized that a vaccine in incomplete Freund's adjuvant (IFA) would increase dermal Th1 and Tc1-lymphocytes and mature DCs, but that repeated vaccination may increase regulatory cells.MethodsDuring and after 6 weekly immunizations with a multipeptide vaccine, immunization sites were biopsied at weeks 0, 1, 3, 7, or 12. In 36 participants, we enumerated DCs and lymphocyte subsets by immunohistochemistry and characterized their location within skin compartments.ResultsMature DCs aggregated with lymphocytes around superficial vessels, however, immature DCs were randomly distributed. Over time, there was no change in mature DCs. Increases in T and B-cells were noted. Th2 cells outnumbered Th1 lymphocytes after 1 vaccine 6.6:1. Eosinophils and FoxP3+ cells accumulated, especially after 3 vaccinations, the former cell population most abundantly in deeper layers.ConclusionsA multipeptide/IFA vaccine may induce a Th2-dominant microenvironment, which is reversed with repeat vaccination. However, repeat vaccination may increase FoxP3+T-cells and eosinophils. These data suggest multiple opportunities to optimize vaccine regimens and potential endpoints for monitoring the effects of new adjuvants.Trail RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00705640

Falls represent a persistent and costly patient safety issue. Fall TIPS (Tailored Interventions for Patient Safety) is a patient-centered and clinical decision-supported, fall prevention program that has led to fewer falls and related injuries among hospitalized patients. We aimed to identify dominant facilitators and barriers to Fall TIPS adoption. This multisite qualitative study was conducted in 11 hospitals representing three academic health systems, where Fall TIPS had been implemented for at least one year. Interviews with 50 patients and focus groups with 71 staff were analyzed using a conventional content analysis. Fall TIPS resulted in a partnership between staff and patients, in which fall prevention interventions were patient-specific and enabled by clinical decision support. We identified three facilitators to program adoption. First, staff were motivated to address falls as staff recognized fall prevention as a priority and the limitations of previous fall prevention programs. Second, patients welcomed their role in fall prevention. Third, Fall TIPS was integrated into existing staff workflows. We identified three dominant barriers to program adoption. First, poor engagement practices among staff limited patients' active participation in fall prevention. Second, the use of residual fall prevention approaches perpetuated a 'one-size fits all' approach to fall prevention. Third, patient willfulness i.e., patients' conscious deviation from fall plans challenged program fidelity. Fall TIPS changed the paradigm of fall prevention by placing an unprecedented focus on patient engagement. Actions that improve staffs' engagement of patients and patient's partnership in fall prevention will assist Fall TIPS adoption.

Background/Objectives: To assess nurses' opinions of the efficacy of using the FallTIPS (Tailoring Interventions for Patient Safety) fall prevention program. Design: Survey research.Setting: Seven adult acute-care hospitals in 2 hospital centers located in Boston and NYC.Participants: A total of 298 medical-surgical nurses on 14 randomly selected units.Intervention: Three-step FallTIPS fall prevention program that had been in use as a clinical program for a minimum of 2 years in each hospital.Measurements: Fall Prevention Efficiency Scale (FPES), range 13-52; fourfactorilly derived subscales: valued, efficiency, balances out and inefficiency; and 13 psychometrically validated individual items.Results: Nurses perceived the FallTIPS fall prevention program to be efficacious. The FPES mean score of 38.55 (SD = 5.05) and median of 39 were well above the lowest possible score of 13 and scale midpoint of 32.5. Most nurses (N = 270, 90.6%) scored above 33. There were no differences in FPES scores between nurses who had only used FallTIPS and nurses who had previously used a different fall prevention program. Conclusion:The nurses who used FallTIPS perceived that efficiencies in patient care compensated for the time spent on FallTIPS. Nurses valued the program and findings confirmed the importance of patient and family engagement with staff in the fall prevention process. Regardless of the fall prevention program used, organizations should examine staff perceptions of their fall prevention program because programs that are not perceived as being useful, efficient, and valuable will lead to nonadherence over time and then will not reduce falls and injuries. The recently developed FPES used in this study is a

With more than 10 million patients with cancer in the United States, pain and symptom management is an important topic for oncology nurses. Complementary therapies, such as therapeutic touch, may offer nurses a nonpharmacologic method to ease patients' pain. Using 12 research studies, the authors examined the evidence concerning the effectiveness of this type of treatment in reducing pain and anxiety.

Purpose The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with high rates of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Prone positioning improves mortality in moderate-to-severe ARDS. Strategies to increase prone positioning under crisis conditions are needed. Material and methods We describe the development of a mobile prone team during the height of the crisis in New York City and describe characteristics and outcomes of mechanically ventilated patients who received prone positioning between April 2, 2020 and April 30, 2020. Results Ninety patients underwent prone positioning for moderate-to-severe ARDS. Sixty-six patients (73.3%) were men, with a median age of 64 years (IQR 53–71), and the median PaO 2 :FiO 2 ratio was 107 (IQR 85–140) prior to prone positioning. Patients required an average of 3 ± 2.2 prone sessions and the median time of each prone session was 19 h (IQR 17.5–20.75). By the end of the study period, proning was discontinued in sixty-seven (65.1%) cases due to clinical improvement, twenty (19.4%) cases due to lack of clinical improvement, six (5.8%) cases for clinical worsening, and ten (9.7%) cases due to a contraindication. Conclusion The rapid development of a mobile prone team safely provided prone positioning to a large number of COVID-19 patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS.

Background Many hospital systems in the United States report injurious inpatient falls using the National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators categories: None, Minor, Moderate, Major, and Death. The Major category is imprecise, including injuries ranging from a wrist fracture to potentially fatal subdural hematoma. The purpose of this project was to refine the Major injury classification to derive a valid and reliable categorization of the types and severities of Major inpatient fall-related injuries. Methods Based on published literature and ranking of injurious fall incident reports (n = 85) from a large Academic Medical Center, we divided the National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators Major category into three subcategories: Major A—injuries that caused temporary functional impairment (eg, wrist fracture), major facial injury without internal injury (eg, nasal bone fracture), or disruption of a surgical wound; Major B—injuries that caused long-term functional impairment or had the potential risk of increased mortality (eg, multiple rib fractures); and Major C—injuries that had a well-established risk of mortality (eg, hip fracture). Based on the literature and expert opinion, our research team reached consensus on an administration manual to promote accurate classification of Major injuries into one of the three subcategories. Results The team tested and validated each of the categories which resulted in excellent interrater reliability (kappa = .96). Of the Major injuries, the distribution of Major A, B, and C was 40.3%, 16.1%, and 43.6%, respectively. Conclusions These subcategories enhance the National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators categorization. Using the administration manual, trained personnel can classify injurious fall severity with excellent reliability.

ObjectivesFall TIPS (Tailoring Interventions for Patient Safety) is an evidence-based fall prevention program that led to a 25% reduction in falls in hospitalized adults. Because it would be helpful to assess nurses’ perceptions of burdens imposed on them by using Fall TIPS or other fall prevention program, we conducted a study to learn benefits and burdens.MethodsA 3-phase mixed-method study was conducted at 3 hospitals in Massachusetts and 3 in New York: (1) initial qualitative, elicited and categorized nurses’ views of time spent implementing Fall TIPS; (2) second qualitative, used nurses’ quotes to develop items, research team inputs for refinement and organization, and clinical nurses’ evaluation and suggestions to develop the prototype scale; and (3) quantitative, evaluated psychometric properties.ResultsFour “time” themes emerged: (1) efficiency, (2) inefficiency, (3) balances out, and (4) valued. A 20-item prototype Fall Prevention Efficiency Scale was developed, administered to 383 clinical nurses, and reduced to 13 items. Individual items demonstrated robust stability with Pearson correlations of 0.349 to 0.550 and paired t tests of 0.155 to 1.636. Four factors explained 74.3% variance and provided empirical support for the scale’s conceptual basis. The scale achieved excellent internal consistency values (0.82–0.92) when examined with the test, validation, and paired (both test and retest) samplesConclusionsThis new scale assess nurses’ perceptions of how a fall prevention program affects their efficiency, which impacts the likelihood of use. Learning nurses’ beliefs about time wasted when implementing new programs allows hospitals to correct problems that squander time.