| Literature DB >> 34108121 |
Hope E M Schwartz1, Nicholas R Stark2, Cathleen S Sowa2, Malini K Singh2, Christopher R Peabody2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic generated an unprecedented volume of evolving clinical guidelines that strained existing clinical information systems and necessitated rapid innovation in emergency departments (EDs).Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; clinical guidelines; design; digital; information; innovation
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34108121 PMCID: PMC7997598 DOI: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2021.03.014
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Emerg Med ISSN: 0736-4679 Impact factor: 1.484
Figure 1Clinical guideline development: key stakeholders and change control process map.
Example Roles, Hours, and Costs to Develop a Web-Based Clinical Information Hub
| Title | Role | Total Hours | Estimated Cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project Manager | Oversee project timeline, coordinate meetings, monitor progress, manage platform revisions | 25–35 | $40–50/h |
| Clinician | Review and approve clinical guidelines, prioritize clinical guidelines to standardize | 25–35 | $150–250/h |
| Nonclinical Project Staff | Draft redesigned clinical guidelines in collaboration with clinical team members | 40–60 | $20–30/h |
| Site Administrator | Regularly update platform with new guidelines | 15–25 | $20–30/h |
One-time total cost range: $5850–$13,050.
Figure 2E*Drive landing page (https://edrive.ucsf.edu).
Figure 3Exemplar protocol pre and post standardization: cervical spine clearance.
GCS = Glasgow Coma Scale score; CT = computed tomography; MRI = magnetic resonance imaging; ED = emergency department.
Quantitative End-User Feedback Survey Results
| Question | Strongly Agree | Agree | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | n | % | n | % | n | % | ||||
| Prior to the E*Drive platform, I felt confident accessing clinical information on the wiki system at ZSFG. | 6 | 12% | 2 | 4% | 29 | 57% | 14 | 27% | |||
| Since the launch of the E*Drive platform, I am able to more easily access clinical information at ZSFG. | 21 | 41% | 28 | 55% | 2 | 4% | 0 | 0% | |||
| Accessing E*Drive is useful in helping me do my job more efficiently. | 14 | 27% | 31 | 61% | 6 | 12% | 0 | 0% | |||
| I find the E*Drive platform understandable and easy to navigate. | 19 | 37% | 31 | 60% | 2 | 4% | 0 | 0% | |||
| Daily | Multiple × /Week | Once/Week | Once/Month | Never | |||||||
| n | % | n | % | n | % | n | % | n | % | ||
| I use the E*Drive platform approximately: | 3 | 6% | 8 | 15% | 18 | 35% | 18 | 35% | 5 | 10% | |