Reducing Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate Ordering: De-implementation and Diagnostic Stewardship.

Q1 Nursing Hospital pediatrics Pub Date : 2024-08-01 DOI:10.1542/hpeds.2023-007642
Yasaman Fatemi, Tracey Polsky, Julianne Burns, Nathan L'Etoile, Amrom Obstfeld, Joseph J Zorc, Ellen Nord, Susan Coffin, Kathy Shaw
{"title":"Reducing Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate Ordering: De-implementation and Diagnostic Stewardship.","authors":"Yasaman Fatemi, Tracey Polsky, Julianne Burns, Nathan L'Etoile, Amrom Obstfeld, Joseph J Zorc, Ellen Nord, Susan Coffin, Kathy Shaw","doi":"10.1542/hpeds.2023-007642","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The Choosing Wisely campaign recommends against the routine use of erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) for the assessment of acute undiagnosed inflammation or infection. We examined ESR and C-reactive protein (CRP) ordering practices at a large, freestanding children's hospital. We found that 80% of ESR orders were placed concurrently with a CRP order. We aimed to reduce the ESR testing rate by 20% within 6 months in both inpatient and emergency department (ED) settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Applying Lean process improvement principles, we interviewed stakeholders from multiple subspecialties and engaged the institutional laboratory stewardship committee to identify the root causes of ESR ordering and design interventions. We conducted provider education (November 2020) and employed clinical decision support through an order panel in the electronic health record (April 2021). The outcome measures were monthly ESR testing rate per 1000 patient days (inpatient) and per 1000 ED visits, analyzed using statistical process control charts. CRP testing rate was a balancing measure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After intervention implementation, the ESR testing rate decreased from 11.4 to 8.9 tests per 1000 inpatient patient days (22% decrease) and from 49.4 to 29.5 tests per 1000 ED visits (40% decrease). This change has been sustained for >1 year postintervention. Interventions were effective even during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic when there was a rise in baseline ED ESR ordering rate. CRP testing rates did not increase after the interventions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Education and clinical decision support were effective in reducing the ESR ordering rate in both inpatient and ED settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":38180,"journal":{"name":"Hospital pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":"658-665"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hospital pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1542/hpeds.2023-007642","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The Choosing Wisely campaign recommends against the routine use of erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) for the assessment of acute undiagnosed inflammation or infection. We examined ESR and C-reactive protein (CRP) ordering practices at a large, freestanding children's hospital. We found that 80% of ESR orders were placed concurrently with a CRP order. We aimed to reduce the ESR testing rate by 20% within 6 months in both inpatient and emergency department (ED) settings.

Methods: Applying Lean process improvement principles, we interviewed stakeholders from multiple subspecialties and engaged the institutional laboratory stewardship committee to identify the root causes of ESR ordering and design interventions. We conducted provider education (November 2020) and employed clinical decision support through an order panel in the electronic health record (April 2021). The outcome measures were monthly ESR testing rate per 1000 patient days (inpatient) and per 1000 ED visits, analyzed using statistical process control charts. CRP testing rate was a balancing measure.

Results: After intervention implementation, the ESR testing rate decreased from 11.4 to 8.9 tests per 1000 inpatient patient days (22% decrease) and from 49.4 to 29.5 tests per 1000 ED visits (40% decrease). This change has been sustained for >1 year postintervention. Interventions were effective even during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic when there was a rise in baseline ED ESR ordering rate. CRP testing rates did not increase after the interventions.

Conclusions: Education and clinical decision support were effective in reducing the ESR ordering rate in both inpatient and ED settings.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
减少红细胞沉降率订购:去执行化与诊断管理。
目的:选择明智 "运动建议不要常规使用红细胞沉降率(ESR)来评估急性未确诊炎症或感染。我们研究了一家大型独立儿童医院的红细胞沉降率和 C 反应蛋白 (CRP) 订购方法。我们发现,80% 的血沉和 CRP 订单是同时下达的。我们的目标是在 6 个月内将住院病人和急诊科 (ED) 的血沉检测率降低 20%:方法:我们运用精益流程改进原则,采访了来自多个亚专科的利益相关者,并让机构实验室监管委员会参与其中,以确定 ESR 订单的根本原因并设计干预措施。我们对提供者进行了教育(2020 年 11 月),并通过电子健康记录中的订单面板采用了临床决策支持(2021 年 4 月)。结果测量指标是每月每 1000 个患者日(住院患者)和每 1000 个急诊室就诊的 ESR 检测率,使用统计过程控制图进行分析。CRP 检测率是一项平衡指标:干预措施实施后,每 1000 个住院患者日的血沉检测率从 11.4 降至 8.9(降幅为 22%),每 1000 次急诊就诊的血沉检测率从 49.4 降至 29.5(降幅为 40%)。这种变化在干预后持续了一年以上。即使在 2019 年冠状病毒疾病大流行期间,当急诊室血沉的基线订购率上升时,干预措施也是有效的。CRP检测率在干预后没有增加:教育和临床决策支持可有效降低住院病人和急诊室的血沉下单率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Hospital pediatrics
Hospital pediatrics Nursing-Pediatrics
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
204
期刊最新文献
Testing and Treatment Thresholds for Pediatric Pneumonia in the Emergency Department. It's More Complicated Than Interpreter Use: Improving Care for Non-English-Speaking Families. Factors Associated With Nirsevimab Uptake in Healthy Newborns. Nirsevimab Administration During the Birth Hospitalization. Extravasation Identification and Management in Neonates and Pediatrics: A Cross Sectional Survey.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1