Implementing an innovative consent form: the PREDICT experience

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In the setting of coronary angiography, generic consent forms permit highly variable communication between patients and physicians. Even with the existence of multiple risk models, clinicians have been unable to readily access them and thus provide patients with vague estimations regarding risks of the procedure.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We created a web-based vehicle, PREDICT, for embedding patient-specific estimates of risk from validated multivariable models into individualized consent documents at the point-of-care. Beginning August 2006, outpatients undergoing coronary angiography at the Mid America Heart Institute received individualized consent documents generated by PREDICT. In February 2007 this approach was expanded to all patients undergoing coronary angiography within the four Kansas City hospitals of the Saint Luke's Health System. Qualitative research methods were used to identify the implementation challenges and successes with incorporating PREDICT-enhanced consent documents into routine clinical care from multiple perspectives: administration, information systems, nurses, physicians, and patients.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Most clinicians found usefulness in the tool (providing clarity and educational value for patients) and satisfaction with the altered processes of care, although a few cardiologists cited delayed patient flow and excessive patient questions. The responses from administration and patients were uniformly positive. The key barrier was related to informatics.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This preliminary experience suggests that successful change in clinical processes and organizational culture can be accomplished through multidisciplinary collaboration. A randomized trial of PREDICT consent, leveraging the accumulated knowledge from this first experience, is needed to further evaluate its impact on medical decision-making, patient compliance, and clinical outcomes.</p

Development and implementation of a quality improvement process for echocardiographic laboratory accreditation

We describe our process for quality improvement (QI) for a 3-year accreditation cycle in echocardiography by the Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) for a large group practice. Echocardiographic laboratory accreditation by the IAC was introduced in 1996, which is not required but could impact reimbursement. To ensure high-quality patient care and community recognition as a facility committed to providing high-quality echocardiographic services, we applied for IAC accreditation in 2010. Currently, there is little published data regarding the IAC process to meet echocardiography standards. We describe our approach for developing a multicampus QI process for echocardiographic laboratory accreditation during the 3-year cycle of accreditation by the IAC. We developed a quarterly review assessing (1) the variability of the interpretations, (2) the quality of the examinations, (3) a correlation of echocardiographic studies with other imaging modalities, (4) the timely completion of reports, (5) procedure volume, (6) maintenance of Continuing Medical Education credits by faculty, and (7) meeting Appropriate Use Criteria. We developed and implemented a multicampus process for QI during the 3-year accreditation cycle by the IAC for Echocardiography. We documented both the process and the achievement of those metrics by the Echocardiography Laboratories at the Ochsner Medical Institutions. We found the QI process using IAC standards to be a continuous educational experience for our Echocardiography Laboratory physicians and staff. We offer our process as an example and guide for other echocardiography laboratories who wish to apply for such accreditation or reaccreditation