TY - JOUR
T1 - Impact of EHR-based rounding tools on interactive communication
T2 - A prospective observational study
AU - Abraham, Joanna
AU - Jaros, Joanna
AU - Ihianle, Imade
AU - Kochendorfer, Karl
AU - Kannampallil, Thomas
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was supported by a grant from the George H. Miller, Memorial Fund Health Science Student Research (HSSR) award which was facilitated by the Office of Vice Chancellor of Health Affairs at University of Illinois at Chicago. We would like to acknowledge our participants and Mary Buzzard who assisted with data collection.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2019/9
Y1 - 2019/9
N2 - Objective: Structured rounding tools have shown to improve the overall efficiency and perceived satisfaction with the rounding process. However, little is known about how EHR-integrated rounding tools impact the content, structure and interactivity of communication during rounds. Method: We conducted a prospective pre-post evaluation with two rounding tools: a Microsoft Word-based fillable rounding tool (usual tool), and an EHR-integrated rounding report tool (RRT). 27 clinicians across two teams participated in rounds for 169 patients (nusual=84, nRRT=85). We audio-recorded and coded communication during rounds using conversational analysis methods. Using the coded communication interactions, we investigated differences between the two tools on: clinical content discussed, questions raised, and breakdowns in interactive communication. Additionally, we gathered clinician perspectives on the rounding tools through follow-up interviews. Results: We found that the use of RRT was associated with significantly more discussion of patient identifiers (e.g., name), and action items (e.g., to-do list) and significantly less discussion of imaging (e.g., X-rays) than the usual tool. RRT was also associated with fewer questions (t = 3.1, p = 0.03), and correspondingly, fewer responses (t = 3.2, p = 0.02). Communication breakdowns related to incorrect responses was fewer during the use of RRT (t = 0.5, p = 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences in the time spent for rounding between the two tools. Conclusions: Our findings showed that RRT impacted rounding workflow: during pre-rounding, by saving time and effort in gathering information from multiple sources; during rounding, by streamlining content of the conversations using the structured RRT template; and during post-rounding, by supporting explicit discussion of patient tasks and action items for patient care planning and management.
AB - Objective: Structured rounding tools have shown to improve the overall efficiency and perceived satisfaction with the rounding process. However, little is known about how EHR-integrated rounding tools impact the content, structure and interactivity of communication during rounds. Method: We conducted a prospective pre-post evaluation with two rounding tools: a Microsoft Word-based fillable rounding tool (usual tool), and an EHR-integrated rounding report tool (RRT). 27 clinicians across two teams participated in rounds for 169 patients (nusual=84, nRRT=85). We audio-recorded and coded communication during rounds using conversational analysis methods. Using the coded communication interactions, we investigated differences between the two tools on: clinical content discussed, questions raised, and breakdowns in interactive communication. Additionally, we gathered clinician perspectives on the rounding tools through follow-up interviews. Results: We found that the use of RRT was associated with significantly more discussion of patient identifiers (e.g., name), and action items (e.g., to-do list) and significantly less discussion of imaging (e.g., X-rays) than the usual tool. RRT was also associated with fewer questions (t = 3.1, p = 0.03), and correspondingly, fewer responses (t = 3.2, p = 0.02). Communication breakdowns related to incorrect responses was fewer during the use of RRT (t = 0.5, p = 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences in the time spent for rounding between the two tools. Conclusions: Our findings showed that RRT impacted rounding workflow: during pre-rounding, by saving time and effort in gathering information from multiple sources; during rounding, by streamlining content of the conversations using the structured RRT template; and during post-rounding, by supporting explicit discussion of patient tasks and action items for patient care planning and management.
KW - Breakdowns
KW - Communication
KW - Conversational analysis
KW - Rounding
KW - Team communication
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85070291611&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.07.012
DO - 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.07.012
M3 - Article
C2 - 31445286
AN - SCOPUS:85070291611
SN - 1386-5056
VL - 129
SP - 423
EP - 429
JO - International Journal of Medical Informatics
JF - International Journal of Medical Informatics
ER -