Julia K Lloyd1,2, Erin A Ahrens3, Donnie Clark3, Terri Dachenhaus1, Kathryn E Nuss1,2,4. 1. Division of Emergency Medicine, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio, United States. 2. The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States. 3. Information Services, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio, United States. 4. Division of Clinical Informatics, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio, United States.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This article describes the method of integrating a manual pediatric emergency department sepsis screening process into the electronic health record that leverages existing clinical documentation and keeps providers in their current, routine clinical workflows. METHODS: Criteria in the manual pediatric emergency department sepsis screening tool were mapped to standard documentation routinely entered in the electronic health record. Data elements were extracted and scored from the medical history, medication record, vital signs, and physical assessments. Scores that met a predefined sepsis risk threshold triggered interruptive system alerts which notified emergency department staff to perform sepsis huddles and consider appropriate interventions. Statistical comparison of the new electronic tool to the manual process was completed by a two-tail paired t-test. RESULTS: The performance of the pediatric electronic sepsis screening tool was evaluated by comparing flowsheet row documentation of the manual, sepsis alert process against the interruptive system alert instance of the electronic sepsis screening tool. In an 8-week testing period, the automated pediatric electronic sepsis screening tool identified 100% of patients flagged by the manual process (n = 29), on average, 68 minutes earlier. CONCLUSION: Integrating a manual sepsis screening tool into the electronic health record automated identification of pediatric sepsis screening in a busy emergency department. The electronic sepsis screening tool is as accurate as a manual process and would alert bedside clinicians significantly earlier in the emergency department course. Deployment of this electronic tool has the capability to improve timely sepsis detection and management of patients at risk for sepsis without requiring additional documentation by providers. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.
OBJECTIVE: This article describes the method of integrating a manual pediatric emergency department sepsis screening process into the electronic health record that leverages existing clinical documentation and keeps providers in their current, routine clinical workflows. METHODS: Criteria in the manual pediatric emergency department sepsis screening tool were mapped to standard documentation routinely entered in the electronic health record. Data elements were extracted and scored from the medical history, medication record, vital signs, and physical assessments. Scores that met a predefined sepsis risk threshold triggered interruptive system alerts which notified emergency department staff to perform sepsis huddles and consider appropriate interventions. Statistical comparison of the new electronic tool to the manual process was completed by a two-tail paired t-test. RESULTS: The performance of the pediatric electronic sepsis screening tool was evaluated by comparing flowsheet row documentation of the manual, sepsis alert process against the interruptive system alert instance of the electronic sepsis screening tool. In an 8-week testing period, the automated pediatric electronic sepsis screening tool identified 100% of patients flagged by the manual process (n = 29), on average, 68 minutes earlier. CONCLUSION: Integrating a manual sepsis screening tool into the electronic health record automated identification of pediatric sepsis screening in a busy emergency department. The electronic sepsis screening tool is as accurate as a manual process and would alert bedside clinicians significantly earlier in the emergency department course. Deployment of this electronic tool has the capability to improve timely sepsis detection and management of patients at risk for sepsis without requiring additional documentation by providers. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.
Authors: E Rivers; B Nguyen; S Havstad; J Ressler; A Muzzin; B Knoblich; E Peterson; M Tomlanovich Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-11-08 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Fran Balamuth; Scott L Weiss; Matt Hall; Mark I Neuman; Halden Scott; Patrick W Brady; Raina Paul; Reid W D Farris; Richard McClead; Sierra Centkowski; Shannon Baumer-Mouradian; Jason Weiser; Katie Hayes; Samir S Shah; Elizabeth R Alpern Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2015-10-23 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: R Scott Watson; Joseph A Carcillo; Walter T Linde-Zwirble; Gilles Clermont; Jeffrey Lidicker; Derek C Angus Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2002-11-14 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Fran Balamuth; Elizabeth R Alpern; Mary Kate Abbadessa; Katie Hayes; Aileen Schast; Jane Lavelle; Julie C Fitzgerald; Scott L Weiss; Joseph J Zorc Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2017-06-02 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Andrea T Cruz; Andrew M Perry; Eric A Williams; Jeanine M Graf; Elizabeth R Wuestner; Binita Patel Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2011-02-21 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Andrea T Cruz; Eric A Williams; Jeanine M Graf; Andrew M Perry; Devin E Harbin; Elizabeth R Wuestner; Binita Patel Journal: Pediatr Emerg Care Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 1.454
Authors: Raina Paul; Elliot Melendez; Anne Stack; Andrew Capraro; Michael Monuteaux; Mark I Neuman Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2014-04-07 Impact factor: 7.124