Providing timely and effective care in the emergency department (ED) requires the management of individual patients as well as the flow and demands of the entire department. Strategic changes to work processes, such as adding a flow coordination nurse or a physician in triage, have demonstrated improvements in throughput times. However, such global strategic changes do not address the real-time, often opportunistic workflow decisions of individual clinicians in the ED. We believe that real-time representation of the status of the entire emergency department and each patient within it through information visualizations will better support clinical decision-making in-the-moment and provide for rapid intervention to improve ED flow. This notion is based on previous work where we found that clinicians' workflow decisions were often based on an in-the-moment local perspective, rather than a global perspective. Here, we discuss the challenges of designing and implementing visualizations for ED through a discussion of the development of our prototype Throughput Dashboard and the potential it holds for supporting real-time decision-making.
In critical care environments such as the emergency department (ED), many activities and decisions are not planned. In this study, we developed a new methodology for systematically studying what are these unplanned activities and decisions. This methodology expands the traditional naturalistic decision making (NDM) frameworks by explicitly identifying the role of environmental factors in decision making. We focused on decisions made by ED physicians as they transitioned between tasks. Through ethnographic data collection, we developed a taxonomy of decision types. The empirical data provide important insight to the complexity of the ED environment by highlighting adaptive behavior in this intricate milieu. Our results show that half of decisions in the ED we studied are not planned, rather decisions are opportunistic decision (34%) or influenced by interruptions or distractions (21%). What impacts these unplanned decisions have on the quality, safety, and efficiency in the ED environment are important research topics for future investigation.
Objectives Diagnostic errors are common in the emergency department (ED), but few studies have comprehensively evaluated their types and origins. We analysed incidents reported by ED physicians to determine disease conditions, contributory factors and patient harm associated with ED-related diagnostic errors. Methods Between 1 March 2009 and 31 December 2013, ED physicians reported 509 incidents using a department-specific voluntary incident-reporting system that we implemented at two large academic hospitalaffiliated EDs. For this study, we analysed 209 incidents related to diagnosis. A quality assurance team led by an ED physician champion reviewed each incident and interviewed physicians when necessary to confirm the presence/absence of diagnostic error and to determine the contributory factors. We generated descriptive statistics quantifying disease conditions involved, contributory factors and patient harm from errors. Results Among the 209 incidents, we identified 214 diagnostic errors associated with 65 unique diseases/ conditions, including sepsis (9.6%), acute coronary syndrome (9.1%), fractures (8.6%) and vascular injuries (8.6%). Contributory factors included cognitive (n=317), system related (n=192) and non-remedial (n=106). Cognitive factors included faulty information verification (41.3%) and faulty information processing (30.6%) whereas system factors included high workload (34.4%) and inefficient ED processes (40.1%). Non-remediable factors included atypical presentation (31.3%) and the patients' inability to provide a history (31.3%). Most errors (75%) involved multiple factors. Major harm was associated with 34/209 (16.3%) of reported incidents. Conclusions Most diagnostic errors in ED appeared to relate to common disease conditions. While sustaining diagnostic error reporting programmes might be challenging, our analysis reveals the potential value of such systems in identifying targets for improving patient safety in the ED.
IntroductionMedical errors are frequently under-reported, yet their appropriate analysis, coupled with remediation, is essential for continuous quality improvement. The emergency department (ED) is recognized as a complex and chaotic environment prone to errors. In this paper, we describe the design and implementation of a web-based ED-specific incident reporting system using an iterative process.MethodsA web-based, password-protected tool was developed by members of a quality assurance committee for ED providers to report incidents that they believe could impact patient safety.ResultsThe utilization of this system in one residency program with two academic sites resulted in an increase from 81 reported incidents in 2009, the first year of use, to 561 reported incidents in 2012. This is an increase in rate of reported events from 0.07% of all ED visits to 0.44% of all ED visits. In 2012, faculty reported 60% of all incidents, while residents and midlevel providers reported 24% and 16% respectively. The most commonly reported incidents were delays in care and management concerns.ConclusionError reporting frequency can be dramatically improved by using a web-based, user-friendly, voluntary, and non-punitive reporting system.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.