Transcript Care Coordination - community360.net

Handoffs and Coordination of Care
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Presented by: Ayse Gurses, PhD and Jill Marsteller, MPP, PhD
© The Johns Hopkins University and The Johns
Hopkins Health System Corporation, 2011
Agenda
• Communication versus Coordination
• Coordination
– Care Coordination
– Coordination in other disciplines
• Importance of Coordination
• Barriers to Effective Coordination
• Strategies to Improve Coordination
• Gap in Care Coordination Research
• Improving Coordination Across Departments Toolkit
2
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Defining Communication
• “Reproducing at one point either exactly or
approximately the message selected at
another point” (Shannon & Weaver, 1949;
Shannon, 2001)
• Creation and exchange of messages
(Goldhaber, 2003)
• Involves continuous encoding and decoding
in one’s context
• Has directionality and intentionality
3
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Components of Communication
• Five essential components of communication
system (Shannon & Weaver, 1949)
–
–
–
–
–
Information Source
Transmitter
Channel
Receiver
Destination
4
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Elizabeth Dayton et al., Joint Commission Journal, Jan. 2007
Figure 2: Stages of communication, common problems and
solutions
Problems:
Stage 1:
Decide
on
message
Groupthink,
tunnel
vision, low
input
Problems:
Stage 2:
Encode
Ambiguous
language
Solutions:
Solutions:
Psychological safety,
pause points,
diversity, situational
awareness
Structured
communication
tools such as SBAR,
Nonverbal
communication tool
Problems:
Stage3:
Decode
Fatigue,
distraction,
noise, closed
culture
Problems:
Stage 4:
Negotiate
Failure to
speak up,
bullying,
judging
Solutions:
Solutions:
Read back
Assertive
communication, role
playing, nonverbal
communication tool
Problems:
Stage 5:
Escalate
Failure to
seek
mediation
Solutions: Set up
clear chain of
command and
expectations for use
Defining Coordination
• “The joint efforts of independent
communicating actors towards mutually
defined goals” (NSF, 1989)
• “Activities required to maintain consistency
within a work product or to manage
dependencies within the workflow” (Curtis,
1989)
7
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Defining Coordination
• “Managing dependencies among activities”
• Actors performing interdependent activities
may have conflicting interests that need to be
managed
• Complexity of a system impacts coordination
• Example Dependencies
– Shared Resources
– Task/Sub task Management
(Malone and Crowston, 1994)
8
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Task Interdependencies in
Coordination
• Pooled Interdependence
– Separable sub-tasks
• Sequential Interdependence
– Specific time-order
• Reciprocal Interdependence
– Iterative work among members
• Team Interdependence
– Simultaneous and multi-directional workflow
Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action. New York, McGraw-Hill.
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
9
Performance and Interdependency
• Highly interdependent groups of maintenance
technicians had better performance than
hybrid groups of independent and
interdependent technicians
• Interdependent teams have better internal
processes
– e.g., cooperation and learning
Wageman, R. (1995). “Interdependence and group effectiveness.” Administrative Science Quarterly
40: 145-180
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
10
Communication and Coordination:
Differences
• Communication is exchange of messages
• Coordination is the set of joint actions
towards the same goal
• Communication facilitates coordination
– e.g., patient communicates insurance issue,
which helps coordinate post-discharge
planning
11
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Communication and Coordination
• Frequency, mode and medium of
communication can impact coordination
– Depends on the urgency and pertinence
– e.g., nurse updates the electronic system
twice per day on patient’s status vs. talks to
the NP at least twice a day about the status
– Nurse to NP communication facilitates NP’s
decisions about the patient’s care
12
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Care Coordination is…
• “the deliberate organization of patient care
activities between two or more participants
(including patient) involved in a patient’s care to
facilitate the appropriate delivery of health care
services. Organizing care involves the
marshaling of personnel and other resources
needed to carry out all required patient care
activities, and is often managed by the exchange
of information among participants responsible for
different aspects of care”(AHRQ 2007).
13
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Care Coordination: A Case Example
14
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Care Coordination: Distributed
Cognition
• Distributed cognition
– Cognition/knowledge possessed and distributed
across individuals, artifacts, and tools in the
environment.
– E.g., Flow of cooperative work settings
(Hazlehurst et al., 2007)
15
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Care Coordination: Distributed
Cognition
• OR RN hand off information to ICU RN
– “Report Card”
– ICU RN knows what and how to prepare for the
incoming patient
– Steps:
1. OR RN hangs “Report Card” on the OR door
2. Technician picks up “Report Card”
3. Technician gives “Report Card” to ICU RN in
exchange for ICU transport bed.
4. ICU RN prepares for incoming patient
16
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Importance of Care Coordination
•
Care coordination is one of the six strategies to
accomplish improved quality (IOM, 2001)
•
Coordination of multiple people and units can:
–
Minimize financial risk and Maximize value of
services delivered to patient (e.g., through
reducing/eliminating non-value adding activities)
(AHRQ, 2007)
–
Promote an effective patient transfer workflow—
Care of patient requires activities from multiple
departments (e.g., clinical and non clinical)
(Abraham and Reddy, 2010)
–
–
Reduce preventable adverse events (Chen et al., 2000)
Improve patient outcomes (Mitchell et al., 2002)
17
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Impacts of Care Coordination
• Studies in multiple areas (AHRQ, 2007):
– Especially in Chronically ill patients
– Trauma, pediatric, etc.
• Care coordination can:
–
–
–
–
–
–
Reduce mortality (Holland et al., 2005; McAlister et al, 2004)
Reduce re-hospitalizations/re-admissions (Gohler et al., 2006)
Reduce excessive utilization of drugs (Chen et al., 2000)
Reduce medical errors (Chen et al., 2000)
Improve care provider’s satisfaction (Gittell et al., 2008)
Improve family’s and patient’s satisfaction (Weinberg et a.,
2007)
18
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Impact of Coordination in Other
Sectors
• Aircraft maintenance (Suzuki et al 2006)
– Lack of or wrong information delivered causing
safety issues
• Manufacturing (Terwiesch et al., 2002)
– Better planning and less perceived goal
differences
– Concurrent development processes requires tight
coordination
• Service industries (Gittell, 2002)
– Coordination among service providers can
improve customer satisfaction
19
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Barriers to Effective Care
Coordination
• Lack of or inadequate/poorly designed technology
(Abraham and Reddy, 2010)
• Limited understanding about the need of care
coordination
• Lack of trust (McAllister et al., 1995)
• Lack of responsibility and assertiveness (Weinberg et al., 2007)
• Lack of awareness of other people roles and what
information may be required
• Organizational structure (e.g., physical setting, social
norm) (Solet et al., 2005)
• Language barrier (Solet et al., 2005)
• Workload
20
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Example of Barriers to Effective Care
Coordination
• No mechanism to talk about problems between units
• No mechanism to engage members routinely and
consistently to improve care coordination between
units
– E.g., Key players are sometimes missing in routine QI
meetings
• Ambiguity in time limitations
– E.g., Do I need to follow up about a patient who has
left my unit?
• Ambiguity in Boundary/Unit limitations
– E.g., Is it still my patient if the patient has already left
my unit?
21
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Strategies to Improve Coordination
• Disease Management Program(Neumeyer-Gromen et al., 2004)
– Enhance coordination between care providers and a
patient
• Case Management (Richards & Coast, 2002)
– “Cross boundary spanner”
– Assign one person to coordinate care with multiple
providers
• Interprofessional Education (Reeves 2001)
– Educate professionals from multiple health areas
together interactively
22
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Strategies to Improve Coordination
• Team adaptation (Serfaty et al. 1998)
– Model-driven team strategy
• Prosocial orientation (Nauta et al., 2002)
– Employees show a high concern for the goals of
other departments
• Transformation of occupation (Bechky 2003)
– Create awareness of common ground and goals
• These strategies can be implemented together to
improve care coordination.
23
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Strategies to Improve Coordination
• Expansion of the in-group
• Joint problem-solving behavior
• Increased information to improve decisions
24
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Example: Care Coordination Strategy
and Outcomes (Gittell et al., 2000)
• Relational Coordination
• Measure: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire
• Subjects: 338 care providers and 878
patients from 9 hospitals
• Outcomes:
– Post-operative pain reduced
– Length of Stay reduced
25
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Gap
• Lack of studies looking at care coordination
for surgical patient
• Strategies implemented to improve care
coordination do not strongly promote
– Effective and efficient communication
– Complete and accurate information transfer
between units.
• E.g., OR does not know what information to
provide to ICU and vice versa.
26
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Improving Coordination Across
Departments (I-CAD)
27
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
Goals
• Thinking about keeping patients safe during
entire episode of inpatient care
• Increased cross-unit interactions would
encourage shared goals and problem-solving
with respect to quality and safety issues/
initiatives across units within a hospital
• Improved understanding and interactions
across units within a hospital
Conceptual Support
• Improvement of relationships due to:
–
–
–
–
Work on common topics
Increased exposure to problems/ successes of other units
Shared problem-solving
Creation of a super-ordinate identity
• Faster/ greater improvement in QI/PS issues due
to:
– Increased availability of information/ ideas
– Benefits of multiple perspectives
– Coordinated approach across units with common issues
Interventions
• Meetings of an All-unit CUSP team
• Sharing local safety assessment and LFD results
• Joint LFD investigations of common safety issues
• Joint designation/development of new QI initiatives
• Cross-unit Shadowing
• Face-to-face exercise examining needs across units.
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Curtis, B. (1989). Modeling coordination from field experiments. In Proceedings
of the Conference on Organizational Computing, Coordination and
Collaboration: Theories and Technologies for Computer-Supported Work.
Malone, T.W., and Crowston, K. (1994). The interdisciplinary study of
coordination. ACM Computing Surveys, 26(1).
Shannon, C.E., and Weaver, W. (1949). The Mathematical Theory of
Communication. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL.
National Science Foundation. (1989). A report by the NSF-IRIS Review Panel
for Research on Coordination Theory and Technology. NSFF Forms and
Publication Unit, National Science Foundation, Washington, DC.
Shannon, C.E. A mathematical theory of communication. (2001). Mobile
Computing and Communications Review 5(1). (Reprinted for the Bell System
Technical Journal, 1948, Lucent Technologies)
Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action. New York, McGraw-Hill.
Wageman, R. (1995). “Interdependence and group effectiveness.”
Administrative Science Quarterly 40: 145-180.
31
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
AHRQ, Closing the Quality Gap: A Critical Analysis of Quality Improvement Strategies, in Technical
Review, K.G. Shojania, et al., Editors. 2007, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
Institute of Medicine, Institute of Medicine: Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st
century. 2001.
Terwiesch, C., C.H. Loch, and A. De Meyer, Exchanging Preliminary Information in Concurrent
Engineering: Alternative Coordination Strategies. ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, 2002. 13(4).
Gittell, J.H., Relationships between service providers and their impact on customers. Journal of Service
Research, 2002. 4(4): p. 299.
Richards S, Coast J. Interventions to improve access to health and social care after discharge from
hospital: a systematic review. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2003 Jul;8(3):171-9.
Neumeyer-Gromen A, Lampert T, Stark K, Kallischnigg G. Disease management programs for
depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Medical Care.
2004;42(12):1211-21.
Reeves S. A systematic review of the effects of interprofessional education on staff involved in the care of
adults with mental health problems. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2001 Dec;8(6):533-42.
Serfaty, et al., eds. Team coordination training. Making decisions under stress: Implications for individual
and team training. Individual and team decision making under stress: Theoretical underpinnings, ed.
Cannon-Bowers, A. Janis, and S. Eduardo. Vol. xxiii. 1998, American Psychological Association:
Washington DC.
Nauta, A. and K. Sanders, Causes and consequences of perceived goal differences between departments
within manufacturing organizations. Journal of Occupational and Organization Psychology, 2001. 74.
Bechky, B.A., Sharing Meaning Across Occupational Communities: The Transformation of Understanding
on a Production Floor. ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, 2003. 14(3).
Abraham, J. and M.C. Reddy, Challenges to inter-departmental coordination of patient transfers: A
workflow perspective. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 2010. 79(2): p. 112-122.
32
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Chen A, Brown R, Archibald N, Aliotta S, Fox PD. Best practices in coordinated care. March 22,
2000 [Accessed: January 30, 2006]; Available from: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/DemoProjectsEvalRp
ts/downloads/CC_Full_Report.pdf
Mitchell G, Del Mar C, Francis D. Does primary medical practitioner involvement with a specialist
team improve patient outcomes? A systematic review. Br J Gen Pract. 2002 Nov;52(484):934-9.
Gohler A, Januzzi JL, Worrell SS, et al. A systematic meta-analysis of the efficacy and
heterogeneity of disease management programs in congestive heart failure. J Card Fail. 2006
Sep;12(7):554-67.
Gittell, J.H., et al., Impact of Relational Coordination on Job Satisfaction and Quality Outcomes: a
Study of Nursing Homes. Human Resource Management Journal, 2008.
Weinberg, D.B., et al., Beyond our walls: Impact of patient and provider coordination across the
continuum on outcomes for surgical patients. Health Services Research, 2007. 42(1p1): p. 7-24.
Holland, R., et al., Systematic review of multidisciplinary interventions in heart failure. Heart, 2005.
91(7): p. 899-906.
McAlister FA, Stewart S, Ferrua S, McMurray JJ. Multidisciplinary strategies for the management
of heart failure patients at high risk for admission: a systematic review of randomized trials. J Am
Coll Cardiol. 2004 Aug 18;44(4):810-9.
Hazlehurst, B., C.K. McMullen, and P. Gorman, Distributed cognition in the heart room: How
situation awareness arises from coordinated communications during cardiac surgery. Journal of
Biomedical Informatics, 2007. 40: p. 539-551.
Gittell, J.H., et al., Impact of relational coordination on quality of care, postoperative pain and
functioning, and length of stay: a nine-hospital study of surgical patients. Med Care, 2000. 38(8): p.
807-19.
33
Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality