Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Patient and Family Centered I-PASS (PFC I-PASS) emphasizes family and nurse engagement, health literacy, and structured communication on family-centered rounds organized around the I-PASS framework (Illness severity-Patient summary-Action items-Situational awareness-Synthesis by receiver). We assessed adherence, safety, and experience after implementing PFC I-PASS using a novel "Mentor-Trio" implementation approach with multidisciplinary parent-nurse-physician teams coaching sites. METHODS:Hybrid Type II effectiveness-implementation study from 2/29/19-3/13/22 with ≥3 months of baseline and 12 months of postimplementation data collection/site across 21 US community and tertiary pediatric teaching hospitals. We conducted rounds observations and surveyed nurses, physicians, and Arabic/Chinese/English/Spanish-speaking patients/parents. RESULTS:We conducted 4557 rounds observations and received 2285 patient/family, 1240 resident, 819 nurse, and 378 attending surveys. Adherence to all I-PASS components, bedside rounding, written rounds summaries, family and nurse engagement, and plain language improved post-implementation (13.0%-60.8% absolute increase by item), all P < .05. Except for written summary, improvements sustained 12 months post-implementation. Resident-reported harms/1000-resident-days were unchanged overall but decreased in larger hospitals (116.9 to 86.3 to 72.3 pre versus early- versus late-implementation, P = .006), hospitals with greater nurse engagement on rounds (110.6 to 73.3 to 65.3, P < .001), and greater adherence to I-PASS structure (95.3 to 73.6 to 72.3, P < .05). Twelve of 12 measures of staff safety climate improved (eg, "excellent"/"very good" safety grade improved from 80.4% to 86.3% to 88.0%), all P < .05. Patient/family experience and teaching were unchanged. CONCLUSIONS:Hospitals successfully used Mentor-Trios to implement PFC I-PASS. Family/nurse engagement, safety climate, and harms improved in larger hospitals and hospitals with better nurse engagement and intervention adherence. Patient/family experience and teaching were not affected.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Communication, failures during patient handoffs are a significant cause of medical error. There is a paucity of data on standardized handoff tools for intershift transitions of care in pediatric emergency medicine (PEM). The purpose of this quality improvement (QI) initiative was to improve handoffs between PEM attending physicians (i.e., supervising physicians ultimately responsible for patient care) through the implementation of a modified I-PASS tool (ED I-PASS). Our aims were to: (1) increase the proportion of physicians using ED I-PASS by two-thirds and (2) decrease the proportion reporting information loss during shift change by one-third, over a 6-month period. METHODS:After literature and stakeholder review, Expected Disposition, Illness Severity, Patient Summary, Action List, Situational Awareness, Synthesis by Receiver (ED I-PASS) was implemented using iterative Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, incorporating: trained "super-users"; print and electronic cognitive support tools; direct observation; and general and targeted feedback. Implementation occurred from September to April of 2021, during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, when patient volumes were significantly lower than prepandemic levels. Data from observed handoffs were collected for process outcomes. Surveys regarding handoff practices were distributed before and after ED I-PASS implementation. RESULTS:82.8% of participants completed follow-up surveys, and 69.6% of PEM physicians were observed performing a handoff. Use of ED I-PASS increased from 7.1% to 87.5% ( p < .001) and the reported perceived loss of important patient information during transitions of care decreased 50%, from 75.0% to 37.5% ( p = .02). Most (76.0%) participants reported satisfaction with ED I-PASS, despite half citing a perceived increase in handoff length. 54.2% reported a concurrent increase in written handoff documentation during the intervention. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:ED I-PASS can be successfully implemented among attending physicians in the pediatric emergency department setting. Its use resulted in significant decreases in reported perceived loss of patient information during intershift handoffs.

INTRODUCTION: In 2017, SCCM published the ABCDEF bundle, with the F for family engagement and empowerment. Despite this, in the pediatric ICU (PICU) there is hesitation to implement interventions such as Family Centered Rounds (FCR), with concerns including the impact on family anxiety, provider comfort, as well as implementation logistics. However, parents want to be included in rounds and with increasing patient complexity, have important information to share. We undertook an initiative to integrate a structured bundle into our existing FCR to promote family engagement, utilizing a step-wise phased approach to address implementation barriers.
METHOD(S): Evaluating our current process and meeting with stakeholders including family and youth advisors identified areas for improvement. We then drafted a key driver diagram and created SMART aims. We developed an 8-item bundle of best practices, focusing first on the first three items (body language and positioning, introductions, and encouraging families to share observations and questions at the start of FCR) to allow smaller tests of change rather than introducing the whole bundle at once, allowing the team to become comfortable in a stepwise fashion and impacting the family experience right from initial implementation. Rounds observations were done twice weekly with a standardized tool. Our initial interventions to implement the first three elements were: attending ownership, phrasing for inviting families, signage in workrooms, orientation of residents, and weekly email reminders, with monthly data sharing with the team for PDSA cycles.
RESULT(S): There was increased adherence to each of the three bundle elements with these interventions. Comparing baseline to data after 7 months after the interventions listed in methods positioning that supports family engagement increased from 64% to 92%, introductions increased from 2% to 90%, and reinforcement of family engagement increased from 43% to 90%. Comments on patient satisfaction surveys suggest increased engagement.
CONCLUSION(S): While there are perceived barriers to implementing FCR in the PICU setting, using a phased approach to implement change into an existing structure is one strategy for success allowing increasing levels of buy-in, frequent reassessment and small tests of change

BACKGROUND:Variation exists in family-centered rounds (FCR). OBJECTIVE:We sought to understand patient/family and clinician FCR beliefs/attitudes and practices to support implementation efforts. DESIGNS, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:Patients/families and clinicians at 21 geographically diverse US community/academic pediatric teaching hospitals participated in a prospective cohort dissemination and implementation study. INTERVENTION/METHODS:We inquired about rounding beliefs/attitudes, practices, and demographics using a 26-question survey coproduced with family/nurse/attending-physician collaborators, informed by prior research and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES/METHODS:Out of 2578 individuals, 1647 (64%) responded to the survey; of these, 1313 respondents participated in FCR and were included in analyses (616 patients/families, 243 nurses, 285 resident physicians, and 169 attending physicians). Beliefs/attitudes regarding the importance of FCR elements varied by role, with resident physicians rating the importance of several FCR elements lower than others. For example, on adjusted multivariable analysis, attending physicians (odds ratio [OR] 3.0, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.2-7.8) and nurses (OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.3-7.4) were much more likely than resident physicians to report family participation on rounds as very/extremely important. Clinician support for key FCR elements was higher than self-reported practice (e.g., 88% believed family participation was important on rounds; 68% reported it often/always occurred). In practice, key elements of FCR were reported to often/always occur only 23%-70% of the time. RESULT/RESULTS:Support for nurse and family participation in FCR is high among clinicians but varies by role. Physicians, particularly resident physicians, endorse several FCR elements as less important than nurses and patients/families. The gap between attitudes and practice and between clinician types suggests that attitudinal, structural, and cultural barriers impede FCR.

Importance/UNASSIGNED:Patients with language barriers have a higher risk of experiencing hospital safety events. This study hypothesized that language barriers would be associated with poorer perceptions of hospital safety climate relating to communication openness. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To examine disparities in reported hospital safety climate by language proficiency in a cohort of hospitalized children and their families. Design, Setting, and Participants/UNASSIGNED:This cohort study conducted from April 29, 2019, through March 1, 2020, included pediatric patients and parents or caregivers of hospitalized children at general and subspecialty units at 21 US hospitals. Randomly selected Arabic-, Chinese-, English-, and Spanish-speaking hospitalized patients and families were approached before hospital discharge and were included in the analysis if they provided both language proficiency and health literacy data. Participants self-rated language proficiency via surveys. Limited English proficiency was defined as an answer of anything other than "very well" to the question "how well do you speak English?" Main Outcomes and Measures/UNASSIGNED:Primary outcomes were top-box (top most; eg, strongly agree) 5-point Likert scale ratings for 3 Children's Hospital Safety Climate Questionnaire communication openness items: (1) freely speaking up if you see something that may negatively affect care (top-box response: strongly agree), (2) questioning decisions or actions of health care providers (top-box response: strongly agree), and (3) being afraid to ask questions when something does not seem right (top-box response: strongly disagree [reverse-coded item]). Covariates included health literacy and sociodemographic characteristics. Logistic regression was used with generalized estimating equations to control for clustering by site to model associations between openness items and language proficiency, adjusting for health literacy and sociodemographic characteristics. Results/UNASSIGNED:Of 813 patients, parents, and caregivers who were approached to participate in the study, 608 completed surveys (74.8% response rate). A total of 87.7% (533 of 608) of participants (434 [82.0%] female individuals) completed language proficiency and health literacy items and were included in the analyses; of these, 14.1% (75) had limited English proficiency. Participants with limited English proficiency had lower odds of freely speaking up if they see something that may negatively affect care (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.26; 95% CI, 0.15-0.43), questioning decisions or actions of health care providers (aOR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.09-0.41), and being unafraid to ask questions when something does not seem right (aOR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.27-0.71). Individuals with limited health literacy (aOR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.48-0.91) and a lower level of educational attainment (aOR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.36-0.95) were also less likely to question decisions or actions. Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:This cohort study found that limited English proficiency was associated with lower odds of speaking up, questioning decisions or actions of providers, and being unafraid to ask questions when something does not seem right. This disparity may contribute to higher hospital safety risk for patients with limited English proficiency. Dedicated efforts to improve communication with patients and families with limited English proficiency are necessary to improve hospital safety and reduce disparities.

Introduction:Patient and family-centered rounds (PFCRs) are an important element of family-centered care often used in the inpatient pediatric setting. However, techniques and best practices vary, and faculty, trainees, nurses, and advanced care providers may not receive formal education in strategies that specifically enhance communication on PFCRs. Methods:Harnessing the use of structured communication, we developed the Patient and Family-Centered I-PASS Safer Communication on Rounds Every Time (SCORE) Program. The program uses a standardized framework for rounds communication via the I-PASS mnemonic, principles of health literacy, and techniques for patient/family engagement and bidirectional communication. The resident and advanced care provider training materials, a component of the larger SCORE Program, incorporate a flipped classroom approach as well as interactive exercises, simulations, and virtual learning options to optimize learning and retention via a 90-minute workshop. Results:Two hundred forty-six residents completed the training and were evaluated on their knowledge and confidence regarding key elements of the curriculum. Eighty-eight percent of residents agreed/strongly agreed that after training they could activate and engage families and all members of the interprofessional team to create a shared mental model; 90% agreed/strongly agreed that they could discuss the roles/responsibilities of various team members during PFCRs. Discussion:The Patient and Family-Centered I-PASS SCORE Program provides a structured framework for teaching advanced communication techniques that can improve provider knowledge of and confidence with engaging and communicating with patients/families and other members of the interprofessional team during PFCRs.

This study sought to understand caregiver needs of children with tracheostomies (CWT) living at home and inform development of standardized tracheostomy simulation training curricula. Long-term goals are decreasing hospital readmissions following tracheostomy placement and improving family experiences while implementing a medical home model. We recruited caregivers of CWT and conducted semistructured interviews, subsequently recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for emerging themes using NVivo. Demographic data were collected via quantitative surveys. Twenty-seven caregivers participated. Emerging themes included the following: (1) caregivers felt overwhelmed, sad, frightened when learning need for tracheostomy; (2) training described as adequate, but individualized training desired; (3) families felt prepared to go home, but transition was difficult; (4) home nursing care fraught with difficulty and yet essential for families of CWT. Families of CWT have specific needs related to discharge training, resources, support, and home nursing. Provider understanding of caregiver needs is essential for child well-being, patient-/family-centered care, and may improve health outcomes.