8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Validation of the Work Observation Method By Activity Timing (WOMBAT) method of conducting time-motion observations in critical care settings: an observational study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Electronic documentation handling may facilitate information flows in health care settings to support better coordination of care among Health Care Providers (HCPs), but evidence is limited. Methods that accurately depict changes to the workflows of HCPs are needed to assess whether the introduction of a Critical Care clinical Information System (CCIS) to two Intensive Care Units (ICUs) represents a positive step for patient care. To evaluate a previously described method of quantifying amounts of time spent and interruptions encountered by HCPs working in two ICUs.

          Methods

          Observers used PDAs running the Work Observation Method By Activity Timing (WOMBAT) software to record the tasks performed by HCPs in advance of the introduction of a Critical Care clinical Information System (CCIS) to quantify amounts of time spent on tasks and interruptions encountered by HCPs in ICUs.

          Results

          We report the percentages of time spent on each task category, and the rates of interruptions observed for physicians, nurses, respiratory therapists, and unit clerks. Compared with previously published data from Australian hospital wards, interdisciplinary information sharing and communication in ICUs explain higher proportions of time spent on professional communication and documentation by nurses and physicians, as well as more frequent interruptions which are often followed by professional communication tasks.

          Conclusions

          Critical care workloads include requirements for timely information sharing and communication and explain the differences we observed between the two datasets. The data presented here further validate the WOMBAT method, and support plans to compare workflows before and after the introduction of electronic documentation methods in ICUs.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The impact of electronic health records on time efficiency of physicians and nurses: a systematic review.

          A systematic review of the literature was performed to examine the impact of electronic health records (EHRs) on documentation time of physicians and nurses and to identify factors that may explain efficiency differences across studies. In total, 23 papers met our inclusion criteria; five were randomized controlled trials, six were posttest control studies, and 12 were one-group pretest-posttest designs. Most studies (58%) collected data using a time and motion methodology in comparison to work sampling (33%) and self-report/survey methods (8%). A weighted average approach was used to combine results from the studies. The use of bedside terminals and central station desktops saved nurses, respectively, 24.5% and 23.5% of their overall time spent documenting during a shift. Using bedside or point-of-care systems increased documentation time of physicians by 17.5%. In comparison, the use of central station desktops for computerized provider order entry (CPOE) was found to be inefficient, increasing the work time from 98.1% to 328.6% of physician's time per working shift (weighted average of CPOE-oriented studies, 238.4%). Studies that conducted their evaluation process relatively soon after implementation of the EHR tended to demonstrate a reduction in documentation time in comparison to the increases observed with those that had a longer time period between implementation and the evaluation process. This review highlighted that a goal of decreased documentation time in an EHR project is not likely to be realized. It also identified how the selection of bedside or central station desktop EHRs may influence documentation time for the two main user groups, physicians and nurses.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Association of interruptions with an increased risk and severity of medication administration errors.

            Interruptions have been implicated as a cause of clinical errors, yet, to our knowledge, no empirical studies of this relationship exist. We tested the hypothesis that interruptions during medication administration increase errors. We performed an observational study of nurses preparing and administering medications in 6 wards at 2 major teaching hospitals in Sydney, Australia. Procedural failures and interruptions were recorded during direct observation. Clinical errors were identified by comparing observational data with patients' medication charts. A volunteer sample of 98 nurses (representing a participation rate of 82%) were observed preparing and administering 4271 medications to 720 patients over 505 hours from September 2006 through March 2008. Associations between procedural failures (10 indicators; eg, aseptic technique) and clinical errors (12 indicators; eg, wrong dose) and interruptions, and between interruptions and potential severity of failures and errors, were the main outcome measures. Each interruption was associated with a 12.1% increase in procedural failures and a 12.7% increase in clinical errors. The association between interruptions and clinical errors was independent of hospital and nurse characteristics. Interruptions occurred in 53.1% of administrations (95% confidence interval [CI], 51.6%-54.6%). Of total drug administrations, 74.4% (n = 3177) had at least 1 procedural failure (95% CI, 73.1%-75.7%). Administrations with no interruptions (n = 2005) had a procedural failure rate of 69.6% (n = 1395; 95% CI, 67.6%-71.6%), which increased to 84.6% (n = 148; 95% CI, 79.2%-89.9%) with 3 interruptions. Overall, 25.0% (n = 1067; 95% CI, 23.7%-26.3%) of administrations had at least 1 clinical error. Those with no interruptions had a rate of 25.3% (n = 507; 95% CI, 23.4%-27.2%), whereas those with 3 interruptions had a rate of 38.9% (n = 68; 95% CI, 31.6%-46.1%). Nurse experience provided no protection against making a clinical error and was associated with higher procedural failure rates. Error severity increased with interruption frequency. Without interruption, the estimated risk of a major error was 2.3%; with 4 interruptions this risk doubled to 4.7% (95% CI, 2.9%-7.4%; P < .001). Among nurses at 2 hospitals, the occurrence and frequency of interruptions were significantly associated with the incidence of procedural failures and clinical errors.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Emergency department workplace interruptions: are emergency physicians "interrupt-driven" and "multitasking"?

              Although interruptions have been shown in aviation and other work settings to result in error with serious and sometimes fatal consequences, little is known about interruptions in the emergency department (ED). The authors conducted an observational, time-motion task-analysis study to determine the number and types of interruptions in the ED. Emergency physicians were observed in three EDs located in an urban teaching hospital, a suburban private teaching hospital, and a rural community hospital. A single investigator followed emergency staff physicians for 180-minute periods and recorded tasks, interruptions, and breaks-intask. An "interruption" was defined as any event that briefly required the attention of the subject but did not result in switching to a new task. A "break-intask" was defined as an event that required the attention of the physician for more than 10 seconds and subsequently resulted in changing tasks. The mean (+/-SD) total number of patients seen at all three sites during the 180-minute study period was 12.1 +/- 3.7 patients (range 5-20). Physicians performed a mean of 67.6 +/- 15.7 tasks per study period. The mean number of interruptions per 180-minute study period was 30.9 +/- 9.7 and the mean number of breaks-in-task was 20.7 +/- 6.3. Both the number of interruptions (r = 0.63; p < 0.001) and the number of breaks-in-task (r = 0.56; p < 0.001) per observation period were positively correlated with the average number of patients simultaneously managed. Emergency physicians are "interruptdriven." Emergency physicians are frequently interrupted and many interruptions result in breaks-in-task.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Med Inform Decis Mak
                BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
                BioMed Central
                1472-6947
                2011
                17 May 2011
                : 11
                : 32
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
                [2 ]Health Informatics Institute, Room SH 500. Algoma University, 1520 Queen Street East, Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, P6A 2G4, Canada
                [3 ]Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
                [4 ]Division of Critical Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
                [5 ]Centre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
                Article
                1472-6947-11-32
                10.1186/1472-6947-11-32
                3112380
                21586166
                08798ac1-c299-4ffa-8d15-6f3d4d9ca392
                Copyright ©2011 Ballermann et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 2 December 2010
                : 17 May 2011
                Categories
                Research Article

                Bioinformatics & Computational biology
                Bioinformatics & Computational biology

                Comments

                Comment on this article