↓ Skip to main content

Testing the implementation of an electronic process-of-care checklist for use during morning medical rounds in a tertiary intensive care unit: a prospective before–after study

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
Title
Testing the implementation of an electronic process-of-care checklist for use during morning medical rounds in a tertiary intensive care unit: a prospective before–after study
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13613-015-0060-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karena M Conroy, Doug Elliott, Anthony R Burrell

Abstract

To improve the delivery of important care processes in the ICU, morning ward round checklists have been implemented in a number of intensive care units (ICUs) internationally. Good quality evidence supporting their use as clinical support tools is lacking. With increased use of technology in clinical settings, integration of such tools into current work practices can be a challenge and requires evaluation. Having completed preliminary work revealing variations in practice and evidence supporting the construct validity of a process-of-care checklist, the need to develop, test and further validate an e(lectronic)-checklist in an ICU was identified. A prospective, before-after study was conducted in a 19-bed general ICU within a tertiary hospital. Data collection occurred during baseline and intervention periods for 6 weeks each, with education and training conducted over a 4-week period prior to intervention. The e-checklist was used at baseline by ICU research nurses conducting post-ward round audits. During intervention, senior medical staff completed the e-checklist after patient assessments during the morning ward rounds, and research staff conducted post-ward round audits for validity testing (via concordance measurement). To examine changes in compliance over time, checklist-level data were analysed using generalised estimating equations that factored in confounding variables, and statistical process control charts were used to evaluate unit-level data. Established measures of concordance were used to evaluate e-checklist validity. Compliance with each care component improved significantly over time; the largest improvement was for pain management (42% increase; adjusted odds ratio = 23, p < 0.001), followed by glucose management (22% increase, p < 0.001) and head-of-bed elevation (19% increase, p < 0.001), both with odds ratios greater than 10. Most detected omissions were corrected by the following day. Control charts illustrated reduced variability in care compliance over time. There was good concordance between physician and auditor e-checklist responses; seven out of nine cares had kappa values above 0.8. Improvements in the delivery of essential daily care processes were evidenced after the introduction of an e-checklist to the morning ward rounds in an ICU. High levels of agreement between physician and independent audit responses lend support to the validity of the e-checklist.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 85 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 13%
Researcher 10 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Other 5 6%
Other 18 21%
Unknown 21 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 14%
Computer Science 6 7%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Unspecified 3 4%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 28 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 December 2017.
All research outputs
#4,177,584
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#467
of 1,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,806
of 264,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#4
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,043 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,230 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.