| Subject |
Advanced Practice Nursing; Education, Nursing, Graduate; Interdisciplinary Communication; Interprofessional Relations; Standing Orders; Teaching Rounds; Patient Satisfaction; Job Satisfaction; Process Assessment, Health Care; Treatment Outcome; Patient Care Planning; Medical Staff, Hospital; Nurse's Role; Nurse Clinicians; Patient Care Team; Patient-Centered Care; Quality Indicators, Health Care ; Quality of Health Care; Quality Improvement; Poster |
| OCR Text |
Show Improving Collaborative Communication Through Standardizing Interdisciplinary Patient Rounds Alexia Searle, BSN, AGACNP Student Keisa Lynch, DNP, APRN, FNP Key Findings: A framework to standardize Interdisciplinary Patient Rounds did improve the rate and quality of collaborative communication Background Interdisciplinary Patient Rounds (IPRs) are defined as face-to-face communication between a medical provider and a registered nurse in regards to their patient’s plan-of-care A lack of IPRs directly correlates with: increased sentinel events, poor job satisfaction, higher staff turnover rates, disgruntled patients, and hostile work environments Nationally, only 30% of patient rounds included a medical provider and a Registered Nurse (RNs) Identified Barriers to IPRs Time commitment Results were calculated utilizing a one-tailed z-test to compare pre- and post- implementation data Poorly Defined Roles Medical team communication increased by 4.8% secondary to quality improvement efforts Multiple Teams Meeting Simultaneously Availability of Registered Nurses Overwhelmingly, medical providers and RNs felt that project efforts to improve unit communication was effective (p=2.2E-10). The medical unit had an informal expectation that an IPR would be performed for each admitted patient Methods Conclusion Setting: 36-bed Medical/Surgical unit in a urban hospital in the Utah. Primary objective: improving interprofessional communication Data was retrieved from RN-surveys and staff questionnaires pre- and postimplementation This project played a significant role in increasing IPRs that were initiated only after an RN was notified they were beginning (p= 0.002) Post-implementation, both medical providers and RNs improved their understanding of what their role was in IPRs (p= 0.000006) On the medical unit studied during this quality improvement project, only 17% of patient rounds included a medical provider and a Registered Nurse Secondary objective: improve perceived job efficiency with collaborative care Results 51% Collaborative Communication 50% The secondary objective, to improve perceived job efficiency with collaborative care, did not result in significant change (p= 0.236) The longevity of the project was secured through the framework being built into the unit’s RN new-hire orientation. All RNs must have their understanding of the IPR framework signed off by their preceptor prior to practicing independently 49% RN-surveys evaluated objective data surrounding IPRs such as the frequency 48% that formal IPRs occurred and also how often patient rounds occurred informally (e.g. over-the-phone) 47% Staff questionnaires identified barriers to IPRs as well as evaluated staff 46% perceptions and attitudes surrounding IRPs 45% A standardized Interdisciplinary Framework was created to address identified barriers and clearly define the roles of both medical providers and RN in IPRs 44% The results indicate that the primary objective to improve interprofessional communication was achieved through the utilization of educational presentations and an IPR framework Hospital technology and culture must support the continued need for providers and RNs to communicate frequently and effectively to foster quality healthcare Pre-Intervention Post- Intervention COLLEGE OF NURSING |
