Use of a pro forma for head injuries in the accident and emergency department--the way forward

Project to improve the management of the head injury patients presenting to the emergency department

INTRODUCTION

At Sandwell General Hospital, there was no risk stratification tool or pathway for head injury (HI) patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). This resulted in significant delays in the assessment of HI patients, compromising patient safety and quality of care.

AIMS

To employ quality improvement methodology to design an effective adult HI pathway that: ensured >90% of high-risk HI patients being assessed by ED clinicians within 15 min of arrival, reduce CT turnaround times, and aiming to keep the final decision making <4 hours.

METHODS

SWOT analysis was performed; driver diagrams were used to set out the aims and objectives. Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle was used to facilitate the change and monitor the outcomes. Process map was designed to identify the areas for improvement. A new HI pathway was introduced, imaging and transporting the patients was modified, and early decisions were made to meet the standards.

RESULTS

Data were collected and monitored following the interventions. The new pathway improved the proportion of patients assessed by the ED doctors within 15 min from 31% to 63%. The average time to CT head scan was decreased from 69 min to 53 min. Average CT scan reporting time also improved from 98 min to 71 min. Overall, the average time to decision for admission or discharge decreased from 6 hours 48 min to 4 hours 24 min.

CONCLUSIONS

Following implementation of the new HI pathway, an improvement in the patient safety and quality of care was noted. High-risk HI patients were picked up earlier, assessed quicker and had CT head scans performed sooner. Decision time for admission/discharge was improved. The HI pathway continues to be used and will be reviewed and re-audited between 3 and 6 months to ensure the sustained improvement.

Documentation of paediatric head injuries in a mixed metropolitan emergency department

OBJECTIVE

Head injuries are a common presentation of children to Australian EDs. Healthcare documentation is an important tool for enhancing patient care. In our study, we aimed to assess the adequacy of paediatric head injury documentation in a mixed ED.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of presentations to a mixed ED between 2017 and 2018. Children aged <16 years old with a primary diagnosis of head injury were included. Documentation items based on local head injury guidelines were assessed in both medical and nursing documentation. We compared cases aged <1 and ≥1 year.

RESULTS

There were 427 presentations that met the case definition. Medical documentation was present in 422 cases and nursing documentation in 310 cases. In combined medical and nursing documentation, items poorly documented include blood pressure (BP; 21.3%) and secondary survey (16.9%). In solely medical documentation, least commonly documented items are high-risk bony injuries (22.5%), high-risk soft tissue injuries (22.3%), seizure (22.0%) and non-accidental injury (3.6%). Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) was poorly documented in cases aged <1 year (10.9%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The largest gaps in the documentation of paediatric head injuries were BP and paediatric GCS in infants. Future audits and educational strategies should focus on targeting clinically relevant items that are predictive of serious outcomes.

Comparison of the quality of documentation between electronic and paper medical records in orthopaedic trauma patients

ObjectiveThe medical record is critical for documentation and communication between healthcare professionals. This study compared the completeness of orthopaedic documentation between the electronic medical record (EMR) and paper medical record (PMR).MethodsA review was undertaken of 400 medical records (200 EMR, 200 PMR) of patients with operatively managed traumatic lower limb injury. The operative report, discharge summary and first and second out-patient reviews were evaluated using criteria designed by a senior orthopaedic surgeon and senior physiotherapist. The criteria included information deemed critical to the post-operative care of the patient in the first 6 weeks post-surgery.ResultsIn all cases, an operative report was completed by a senior surgeon. Notable findings included inferior documentation of patient weight-bearing status on the operative report in the EMR than PMR group (P = 0.018). There was a significant improvement in the completion of discharge summaries in the EMR compared with PMR cohort (100% vs 82.5% respectively; P < 0.001). In the PMR group, 70.0% of discharge summaries were completed and adequately documented, compared with 91.5% of those in the EMR group (P < 0.001). At out-patient review, there was an improvement in documentation of weight-bearing instructions in the EMR compared with PMR group (81.1% vs 76.2% respectively; P = 0.032).ConclusionThe EMR is associated with an improvement in the standard of orthopaedic medical record documentation, but deficiencies remain in key components of the medical record.What is known about the topic?Medical records are an essential tool in modern medical practice and have significant implications for patient care and management, communication and medicolegal issues. Despite the importance of comprehensive documentation, numerous examples of poor documentation continue to be demonstrated. Recently, significant changes to the medical record in Australia have been implemented with the conversion of some hospitals to an EMR and the implementation of the My Health Record.What does this paper add?Standards of patient care should be monitored continuously and deficiencies identified in order to implement measures for improvement and to close the quality loop. This study has highlighted that although there has been improvement in medical record keeping with the implementation of an EMR, the standard of orthopaedic medical record keeping continues to be below what is expected, and several key areas of documentation require improvement.What are the implications for practitioners?The implications of these findings for practitioners are to highlight current deficiencies in documentation and promote change in current practice to improve the quality of medical record documentation among medical staff. Although the EMR has improved documentation, there remain areas for further improvement, and hospital administrators will find these observations useful in implementing ongoing change.

Pilot intervention to improve the documentation of pediatric injuries in the emergency department, Critical care medicine as a subspecialty of emergency medicine

OBJECTIVES

Our goal was to determine the effectiveness of an intervention aimed at improving the emergency department (ED) documentation of pediatric injuries.

METHODS

All physicians and nursing staff in the ED of an urban teaching hospital and trauma centre underwent focused injury surveillance training and were instructed how to document 14 injury-specific data elements. Pocket reminder cards were provided, and pediatric injury charts were flagged. Subsequently, random samples of pediatric injury charts were analyzed from a 3-month period prior to the intervention and from the corresponding months after the intervention. Post-intervention documentation was compared to pre-intervention documentation for the 14 pre-defined data elements.

RESULTS

Six of the 14 data elements were charted more frequently, and 2 less frequently during the post-intervention phase. Odds ratios ranged from 4.59 (95%CI, 3.40 to 6.19) for charting "the presence of an adult observer" to 0.09 (95%CI, 0.01 to 0.76) for charting "sports equipment related to the injury." The "flagging" of injury charts, as a visual reminder for clinicians to document injury data, seemed to be the most effective component of the intervention.

CONCLUSION

A simple intervention, consisting of staff training, chart modification, and visual flagging of charts, can increase the amount of injury information documented by ED clinicians. Efforts to improve ED charting are most likely to succeed if they include visual prompts for clinicians.

Critical aspects of emergency department documentation and communication

This article focuses on the unique environment of the emergency department (ED) and the issues that place the provider at increased risk of liability actions. Patient care, quality, and safety should always be the primary focus of ED providers. However, the ED chart is the only lasting record of an ED visit, and attention must be paid to proper and accurate documentation. This article introduces the important aspects of ED documentation and communication, with specific focus on key areas of medico-legal risk, the advantages and disadvantages of the available types of ED medical records, the critical transition points of patient handoffs and changes of shift, and the ideal manner to craft effective discharge and follow-up instructions.

A decade of change in regional head injury care: a retrospective review

This paper reviews local and national changes and progress in the care of head injuries over the past decade in the Eastern Region.

Improving documentation of head injured patients admitted to the emergency department ward

OBJECTIVE

Well-written and factually accurate medical records are one of the cornerstones of Emergency Medicine. This audit aimed to assess whether documentation could be improved for head injured patients admitted to the Emergency Department observation ward using a pre-printed proforma.

METHODS

In the first phase the notes of a consecutive series of forty patients admitted for observation to an Emergency Department ward after sustaining a head injury were prospectively audited. A data collection instrument was designed to measure the presence or absence of documentation of mechanism of injury, specific symptoms, signs, medications, investigations and treatment considered essential for gold standard head injury management. In the second phase a specially designed proforma was introduced for all patients being admitted for observation. The notes of a second consecutive series of forty patients were then audited using the same data collection instrument.

RESULTS

The first phase of the audit revealed inadequate documentation with regard to many of the measured variables. Significant Improvements were noted in all measured variables after the introduction of the proforma.

CONCLUSIONS

Documentation of all important positive and negative signs in head injured patients can be time consuming and often a challenge for doctors working in busy Emergency Departments. Accurate documentation is however important from both a clinical and a medico-legal position and this audit have shown that the introduction of a customized proforma can improve the quality of documentation. In addition clinical management of head injured patients may improve as the proforma also acts as a prompt for their subsequent investigation and treatment.

Huit jours d’urgences mains

All the FESUM centers in France, Belgium and Switzerland were invited to participate in this prospective audit, during 1 week in June 2002. In these FESUM centers, the patients are operated by senior hand surgeons or trainees graduated with a microsurgical and a hand surgery University degrees. All acute hand disorders, requiring surgery or not, were to be included. For every case, a standardized form was to be filled. This form included 22 fields concerning the specificities of the patient, the circumstances of the accident, the lesions and initial treatment up to exit of the patient out of the Hand Center. Out of the 43 French centers, 38 (90%) participated in this study, but only 30% in the other French speaking countries. A total of 2360 forms were completed and analyzed, representing a mean of 8 forms per day center (6-147). The population was predominantly active men with a mean age of 31. Manual workers represented 41%, scholars 33%. Most of them came to the Hand Center with a non-specilized vehicle (86%). Emergency medical transportation was required in 130 cases (5.8%). A majority of the patients were treated on an outdoor basis. A 1-day admission concerned 29% of the patients, and 4.6% have been admitted on an indoor basis during several days. Work accident represented 28% of all the cases, while the majority was daily living (62%) or sport (15%) accidents. Closed trauma represented 50% of the cases. Amongst open trauma (974 cases), 862 were simple skin lacerations, 156 skin loss, 140 extensor tendon lacerations, 70 flexor tendon lacerations. A preliminary wound exploration had been performed in a non-specialized center in 124 cases (12%). Complete amputation of some part was observed in 33 cases. In 32%, the initial severity of the lesion led to expect some degree of definitive consequences. Some kind of anesthesia was required in 43% of the cases (local in 41%, troncular in 19%, plexical in 28% and general in 9%). A surgical procedure was performed in 45% of the patients. Microsurgery was necessary in 15%, six of which were replantations. The period between presentation to the Hand Center and treatment was less than 1 day in 95% of the cases. Time of treatment was considered to be delayed in 113 cases (5%). Following this audit, it is considered that the FESUM centers make provision for the care of 120,000 cases per year, 54,000 of which needing a surgical procedure. This may be a small part of the total load of emergency hand surgery throughout the country (generally estimated over 1.4 million), but compares quite favorably with other European studies. We believe that improvement relies essentially on a better orientation of the patients whether they need a simple skill or specialist skill treatment. An information leaflet about orientation of hand trauma has been distributed to non-specialized emergency centers. Hand surgery training must be reevaluated inside the universitary system to avoid a dramatic lack of hand surgeons within a few years. A new audit will be presented next year.

Emergency department documentation in cases of intentional assault

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Emergency department records are an important source of injury surveillance data. However, documentation regarding intentional assault has not been studied and may be suboptimal. The purpose of this study was to analyze physician documentation of assailant, site, and object used in intentional assault.

METHODS

The ED log of an urban Level I trauma center was retrospectively reviewed to identify eligible patients presenting consecutively in November 1996. All acutely injured patients not involved in a motorized vehicle crash were identified.

RESULTS

From the ED log, 1, 483 patients were identified as possible study subjects; 1,457 (98%) charts were located and reviewed and 971 (67%) met inclusion criteria. Of these, 288 (30%) cases resulted from intentional assault. In 67% of patients, there was no documentation of the identity of the assailant. For 13% of cases, there was no documentation regarding the object or force used in the assault. In 79% of cases there was no documentation regarding the site of assault. For 24 cases (8%), the assailant was documented as an intimate partner or ex-partner. Police involvement in these cases was documented 54% of the time, despite the fact that this state mandates police reports for cases of acute partner violence. Social service involvement and shelter referrals were documented in less than one fourth of domestic violence cases.

CONCLUSION

Although the ED commonly treats patients who have been assaulted, basic surveillance data are often omitted from the chart. Structured charting may provide more complete data collection.

Prospective, randomized trial of template-assisted versus undirected written recording of physician records in the emergency department

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine whether use of the T-System (Emergency Services Consultants, Irving, TX) template-generated medical documentation system (1) decreases physician evaluation time in the emergency department, (2) increases gross billing under the 1997 Health Care Financing Administration guidelines by minimizing downcoding caused by inadequate documentation, and (3) increases physician satisfaction with the documentation process, compared with the undirected written narrative format.

METHODS

A prospective, randomized, unblinded, controlled, convenience trial of documentation with the T-System of ED templates versus undirected written documentation was conducted in the ED of a county-owned, university-affiliated hospital. All patients seen between the hours of 7 AM and 10 PM during a 16-day period were included. The intervention was varying the method of documentation of the emergency physician. Adequacy of randomization to the 2 documentation groups was assessed by comparing ED triage classification, patient disposition, level of training of the evaluating physician, and whether ED consultation with other services occurred. Outcome measurements included emergency physician total evaluation and treatment time, professional bill, and satisfaction, as evaluated by a questionnaire completed after the study period. The 2 documentation groups were compared by an intention-to-treat analysis and by Student's t test and the median test as appropriate.

RESULTS

A total of 1,228 patient encounters were included. Emergency physician total evaluation and treatment time with template-directed documentation was 4.6 minutes less than with undirected recording, a difference that was not significant (95% confidence interval [CI], -9.2 to 18.3). Gross billing was $29. 60 more per patient (95% CI, $22.20 to $37.00) with the T-System, as assessed by our hospital coders. This difference was caused by a mean.50 (95% CI,.39 to.60) higher level of evaluation and management coding. Physicians preferred the T-System (P <.0005).

CONCLUSION

Use of template-assisted documentation in the ED was associated with higher gross billing and physician satisfaction but no significant decrease in emergency physician total evaluation time.

Epilepsy in the accident and emergency department--developing a code of safe practice for adult patients. South East and South West Thames Accident and Emergency Specialty Sub-committees

OBJECTIVES

To benchmark current practice in the management of adult patients presenting with seizures to the accident and emergency (A&E) departments by performing a comparative interdepartmental audit. To assess the quality and degree of completeness of documentation in A&E records and to develop a proforma for the documentation of any case presenting with a seizure which would incorporate management guidelines for use by A&E doctors.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, criterion based audit carried out in 12 A&E departments in the South Thames region. It involved 1200 adult patients who presented to A&E departments after a seizure. The degree of completeness of A&E records was assessed using criteria identified by A&E consultants and neurologists. Guidelines for use in the management of patients with seizures have been produced.

RESULTS

Important aspects of the history and examination were frequently unrecorded in patients' notes. The recording of vital signs was particularly poor. A diversity of practice was shown between the departments that were audited and the number of investigations performed in each department varied considerably. Hospital admissions for patients with first seizures varied widely between departments, ranging from between 34.6% to 91.7% of cases. Documentation of advice given to patients about driving was evident in just 0.9% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Wide interdepartmental variation exists in both the quality of information recorded in A&E records and in the management of patients. Deficiencies could be minimised and potential improvements in the quality of documentation might be achieved by the introduction of a structured proforma incorporating pre-defined management guidelines.

Head injuries in the accident and emergency department: are we using resources effectively?

This paper reports a retrospective criterion based audit which reviewed head injury management in two accident and emergency (A&E) departments. Management was compared with regionally agreed criteria for ordering a skull radiograph (SXR) and a computerized tomogram (CT scan) and for admission, and the quality of medical documentation was assessed. A total of 158 patients were reviewed and 132 patients (84%) satisfied the three key areas of recommended head injury management. Failures to satisfy recommended guidelines were present in 19 patients (12%) for SXR, four (2%) for admission and three (2%) for CT scanning. Three skull fractures (two in young babies) would have been missed if the criteria had been adhered to strictly. There was one adverse outcome when a patient who should have been admitted returned to A&E 8 days after initial attendance with a subdural haemorrhage and died shortly afterwards. Apart from 'loss of consciousness', the quality both in content and legibility of the medical documentation was poor. The result of 84% correctly managed patients may be over-optimistic according to the criteria used. Although criteria have a valuable role to play, there are problems with prescriptive standard setting. A recommendation was made to develop a head injury pro forma to address the poor quality medical documentation and it was also recommended that the SXR, CT scan and admission criteria for babies and young children be reviewed.