急诊科老年患者 4Ms 工作表的可用性:定性研究。

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE Western Journal of Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI:10.5811/westjem.18088
Mackenzie A McKnight, Melissa K Sheber, Daniel J Liebzeit, Aaron T Seaman, Erica K Husser, Harleah G Buck, Heather S Reisinger, Sangil Lee
{"title":"急诊科老年患者 4Ms 工作表的可用性:定性研究。","authors":"Mackenzie A McKnight, Melissa K Sheber, Daniel J Liebzeit, Aaron T Seaman, Erica K Husser, Harleah G Buck, Heather S Reisinger, Sangil Lee","doi":"10.5811/westjem.18088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Older adults often have multiple comorbidities; therefore, they are at high risk for adverse events after discharge. The 4Ms framework-what matters, medications, mentation, mobility-has been used in acute and ambulatory care settings to identify risk factors for adverse events in older adults, although it has not been used in the emergency department (ED). We aimed to determine whether 1) use of the 4Ms worksheet would help emergency clinicians understand older adult patients' goals of care and 2) use of the worksheet was feasible in the ED.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a qualitative, descriptive study among patients aged ≥60 years and emergency clinicians from January-June 2022. Patients were asked to fill out a 4Ms worksheet; following this, semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients and clinicians separately. We analysed data to create codes, which were divided into categories and sub-categories.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 20 older patients and 19 emergency clinicians were interviewed. We identified two categories based on our aims: understanding patient goals of care (sub-categories: clinician/ patient concordance; understanding underlying goals of care; underlying goals of care discrepancy) and use of 4Ms Worksheet (sub-categories: worksheet to discussion discrepancy; challenges using worksheet; challenge completing worksheet before discharge). Rates of concordance between patient and clinician on main concern/goal of care and underlying goals of care were 82.4% and 15.4%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We found that most patients and emergency clinicians agreed on the main goal of care, although clinicians often failed to elicit patients' underlying goal(s) of care. Additionally, many patients preferred to have the interviewer fill out the worksheet for them. There was often discrepancy between what was written and what was discussed with the interviewer. More research is needed to determine the best way to integrate the 4Ms framework within emergency care.</p>","PeriodicalId":23682,"journal":{"name":"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":"25 2","pages":"230-236"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11000547/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Usability of the 4Ms Worksheet in the Emergency Department for Older Patients: A Qualitative Study.\",\"authors\":\"Mackenzie A McKnight, Melissa K Sheber, Daniel J Liebzeit, Aaron T Seaman, Erica K Husser, Harleah G Buck, Heather S Reisinger, Sangil Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.5811/westjem.18088\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Older adults often have multiple comorbidities; therefore, they are at high risk for adverse events after discharge. The 4Ms framework-what matters, medications, mentation, mobility-has been used in acute and ambulatory care settings to identify risk factors for adverse events in older adults, although it has not been used in the emergency department (ED). We aimed to determine whether 1) use of the 4Ms worksheet would help emergency clinicians understand older adult patients' goals of care and 2) use of the worksheet was feasible in the ED.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a qualitative, descriptive study among patients aged ≥60 years and emergency clinicians from January-June 2022. Patients were asked to fill out a 4Ms worksheet; following this, semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients and clinicians separately. We analysed data to create codes, which were divided into categories and sub-categories.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 20 older patients and 19 emergency clinicians were interviewed. We identified two categories based on our aims: understanding patient goals of care (sub-categories: clinician/ patient concordance; understanding underlying goals of care; underlying goals of care discrepancy) and use of 4Ms Worksheet (sub-categories: worksheet to discussion discrepancy; challenges using worksheet; challenge completing worksheet before discharge). Rates of concordance between patient and clinician on main concern/goal of care and underlying goals of care were 82.4% and 15.4%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We found that most patients and emergency clinicians agreed on the main goal of care, although clinicians often failed to elicit patients' underlying goal(s) of care. Additionally, many patients preferred to have the interviewer fill out the worksheet for them. There was often discrepancy between what was written and what was discussed with the interviewer. More research is needed to determine the best way to integrate the 4Ms framework within emergency care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23682,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"volume\":\"25 2\",\"pages\":\"230-236\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11000547/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.18088\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.18088","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言老年人通常患有多种并发症,因此出院后发生不良事件的风险很高。4Ms框架(重要事项、用药、精神状态、行动能力)已被用于急诊和非卧床护理环境中,以识别老年人不良事件的风险因素,但尚未用于急诊科(ED)。我们旨在确定:1)使用 4Ms 工作表是否有助于急诊临床医生了解老年患者的护理目标;2)在急诊科使用该工作表是否可行:我们在 2022 年 1 月至 6 月期间对年龄≥60 岁的患者和急诊临床医生进行了一项描述性定性研究。我们要求患者填写 4Ms 工作表,然后分别对患者和临床医生进行半结构化访谈。我们对数据进行了分析,创建了代码,并将其分为类别和子类别:共有 20 名老年患者和 19 名急诊临床医生接受了访谈。根据我们的目标,我们确定了两个类别:了解患者的护理目标(子类别:临床医生/患者一致;了解基本护理目标;基本护理目标差异)和使用 4Ms 工作表(子类别:讨论差异的工作表;使用工作表的挑战;出院前完成工作表的挑战)。患者和临床医生在主要关注点/护理目标和基本护理目标上的一致率分别为 82.4% 和 15.4%:我们发现,大多数患者和急诊临床医生在主要护理目标上达成了一致,但临床医生往往未能了解患者的基本护理目标。此外,许多患者更愿意让访谈者代为填写工作表。所填写的内容与与访谈者讨论的内容往往不一致。需要进行更多研究,以确定将 4Ms 框架融入急诊护理的最佳方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Usability of the 4Ms Worksheet in the Emergency Department for Older Patients: A Qualitative Study.

Introduction: Older adults often have multiple comorbidities; therefore, they are at high risk for adverse events after discharge. The 4Ms framework-what matters, medications, mentation, mobility-has been used in acute and ambulatory care settings to identify risk factors for adverse events in older adults, although it has not been used in the emergency department (ED). We aimed to determine whether 1) use of the 4Ms worksheet would help emergency clinicians understand older adult patients' goals of care and 2) use of the worksheet was feasible in the ED.

Methods: We conducted a qualitative, descriptive study among patients aged ≥60 years and emergency clinicians from January-June 2022. Patients were asked to fill out a 4Ms worksheet; following this, semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients and clinicians separately. We analysed data to create codes, which were divided into categories and sub-categories.

Results: A total of 20 older patients and 19 emergency clinicians were interviewed. We identified two categories based on our aims: understanding patient goals of care (sub-categories: clinician/ patient concordance; understanding underlying goals of care; underlying goals of care discrepancy) and use of 4Ms Worksheet (sub-categories: worksheet to discussion discrepancy; challenges using worksheet; challenge completing worksheet before discharge). Rates of concordance between patient and clinician on main concern/goal of care and underlying goals of care were 82.4% and 15.4%, respectively.

Conclusion: We found that most patients and emergency clinicians agreed on the main goal of care, although clinicians often failed to elicit patients' underlying goal(s) of care. Additionally, many patients preferred to have the interviewer fill out the worksheet for them. There was often discrepancy between what was written and what was discussed with the interviewer. More research is needed to determine the best way to integrate the 4Ms framework within emergency care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Western Journal of Emergency Medicine
Western Journal of Emergency Medicine Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.20%
发文量
125
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: WestJEM focuses on how the systems and delivery of emergency care affects health, health disparities, and health outcomes in communities and populations worldwide, including the impact of social conditions on the composition of patients seeking care in emergency departments.
期刊最新文献
Impact of Prehospital Ultrasound Training on Simulated Paramedic Clinical Decision-Making. Interfacility Patient Transfers During COVID-19 Pandemic: Mixed-Methods Study. Making A Difference: Launching a Multimodal, Resident-Run Social Emergency Medicine Program. Methadone Initiation in the Emergency Department for Opioid Use Disorder. Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Predicts Sepsis in Adult Patients Meeting Two or More Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Criteria.
×
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