PurposeThe purpose of this study was to assess physicians’ perceptions on a newly developed electronic transfer of care (e-TOC) communication tool and identify barriers and opportunities toward its adoption.Participants and methodsThe study was conducted in a tertiary care teaching center as part of a randomized controlled trial assessing the efficacy of an e-TOC communication tool. The e-TOC technology was developed through iterative consultation with stakeholders. This e-TOC summary was populated by acute care physicians (AcPs) and communicated electronically to community care physicians (CcPs). The AcPs consisted of attending physicians, resident trainees, and medical students rotating through the Medical Teaching Unit. The CcPs were health care providers caring for patients discharged from hospital to the community. AcPs and CcPs completed validated surveys assessing their experience with the newly developed e-TOC tool. Free text questions were added to gather general comments from both groups of physicians. Units of analysis were individual physicians. Data from the surveys were analyzed using mixed methods.ResultsAcPs completed 138 linked pre- and post-rotation surveys. At post-rotation, each AcP completed an average of six e-TOC summaries, taking an average of 37 minutes per e-TOC summary. Over 100 CcPs assessed the quality of the TOC summaries, with an overall rating of 8.3 (standard deviation: 1.48; on a scale of 1–10). Thematic analyses revealed barriers and opportunities encountered by physicians toward the adoption of the e-TOC tool. While the AcPs highlighted issues with timeliness, usability, and presentation, the CcPs identified barriers accessing the web-based TOC summaries, emphasizing that the summaries were timely and the quality of information supported continuity of care.ConclusionDespite the barriers identified by both groups of physicians, the e-TOC communication tool was well received. Our experience can serve as a template for other health research teams considering the implementation of e-health technologies into health care systems.

BackgroundThough often used to control outbreaks, the efficacy of ward closure is unclear. This systematic review sought to identify studies defining and describing ward closure in outbreak control and to determine impact of ward closure as an intervention on outbreak containment.MethodsWe searched these databases with no language restrictions: MEDLINE, 1946 to 7 July 2014; EMBASE, 1974 to 7 July 2014; CINAHL, 1937 to 8 July 2014; and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2005 to May 2014. We also searched the following: IndMED; LILACS; reference lists from retrieved articles; conference proceedings; and websites of the CDCP, the ICID, and the WHO. We included studies of patients hospitalized in acute care facilities; used ward closure as a control measure; used other control measures; and discussed control of the outbreak(s) under investigation. A component approach was used to assess study quality.ResultsWe included 97 English and non-English observational studies. None included a controlled comparison between ward closure and other interventions. We found that ward closure was often used as part of a bundle of interventions but could not determine its direct impact separate from all the other interventions whether used in parallel or in sequence with other interventions. We also found no universal definition of ward closure which was widely accepted.ConclusionsWith no published controlled studies identified, ward closure for control of outbreaks remains an intervention that is not evidence based and healthcare personnel will need to continue to balance the competing risks associated with its use, taking into consideration the nature of the outbreak, the type of pathogen and its virulence, mode of transmission, and the setting in which it occurs. Our review has identified a major research gap in this area.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13643-015-0131-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Long Emergency Department (ED) wait times represent a key point for quality improvement in many healthcare systems. A delayed ED disposition decision may lead to increased length of hospital stay, healthcare cost, and mortality. The objective of this resident-driven quality improvement (QI) intervention was to determine if a standardized resident admission protocol could reduce the ‘decision-to-admit’ (DTA) time of patients being assessed for admission to internal medicine (IM) at 3 tertiary care teaching hospitals.

No abstract