The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/cc10341) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
HLL designed the study, performed the observations, analysed the data and drafted the manuscript. EK acted as an intercoder and made comments on the manuscript. HK, JP and JF helped to draft the manuscript. SS supervised the study, assisted in the design of the study and prepared the final manuscript with HLL. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Management of daily activities in ICUs is challenging. ICU shift leaders, charge nurses and intensivists have to make several immediate ad hoc decisions to enable the fluent flow of ICU activities. Even though the management of ICU activities is quite well delineated by international consensus guidelines, we know only a little about the content of the real clinical decision making of ICU shift leaders.
We conducted an observational study with the think-aloud technique to describe the ad hoc decision making of ICU shift leaders. The study was performed in two university-affiliated hospital ICUs. Twelve charge nurses and eight intensivists were recruited. Observations were recorded and transcribed for qualitative content analysis using the protocol analysis method. The software program NVivo 7 was used to manage the data. The interrater agreement was assessed with percentages and by Cohen's κ.
We identified 463 ad hoc decisions made by the charge nurses and 444 made by the intensivists. During our data collection time, this breaks down to over 230 immediately made decisions per day (24 hours). We divided the ad hoc decision making of ICU shift leaders into two types: process-focused and situation-focused. Process-focused decision making included more permanent information, such as human resources, know-how and material resources, whereas situation-focused decision making included decisions about single events, such as patient admission. We named eight different categories for ICU ad hoc decision making: (1) adverse events, (2) diagnostics, (3) human resources and know-how, (4) material resources, (5) patient admission, (6) patient discharge, (7) patient information and vital signs and (8) special treatments.
ICU shift leaders make a great number of complex ad hoc decisions throughout the day. Often this decision making involves both intensivists and charge nurses. It forms a bundle that requires versatile, immediate information for a successful outcome. In the future, we need to investigate which information is crucial for ad hoc decision making. These challenges should also be emphasised when information technology programs for ICU care management are developed.
van Lieshout EJ, de Vos R, Binnekade JM, de Haan R, Schultz MJ, Vroom MB: Decision making in interhospital transport of critically ill patients: national questionnaire survey among critical care physicians. Intensive Care Med 2008, 34: 1269-1273. 10.1007/s00134-008-1023-x PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
Reddy MC, Spence PR: Collaborative information seeking: a field study of a multidisciplinary patient care team. Inf Process Manag 2008, 44: 242-255. 10.1016/j.ipm.2006.12.003 CrossRef
Centricity™ Critical Care[ http://www.gehealthcare.com/euen/iis/products/acute-care/iis_acute_care.html]
Ericsson KA, Simon HA: Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. Revised edition edition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1993.
Bazeley P: Qualitative Data Analysis with NVivo. 2nd edition. London: Sage Publications; 2007.
Ludgrén-Laine H, Salanterä S: Think-aloud technique and protocol analysis in clinical decision-making research. Qual Health Res 2010, 20: 565-575. 10.1177/1049732309354278 CrossRef
Medical Research Act[ http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/kaannokset/1999/en19990488.pdf]
Reddy MC, Pratt W, Dourish P, Shabot MM: Asking questions: information needs in a surgical intensive care unit. Proc AMIA Symp 2002, 647-651.
Singh M, Nayyar V, Clark P, Kim C: Does after-hours discharge of ICU patients influence outcome? Crit Care Resusc 2010, 12: 156-161. PubMed
Flaatten H: Self-reporting of errors and adverse events in the intensive care unit (ICU). In Organisation and Management of Intensive Care. Edited by: Flaatten H, Putensen C, Moreno RP, Rhodes A. Berlin: MWV Medizinisch Wissenschaftliche Verlag; 2010:369-373.
Haupt MT, Bekes CE, Brilli RJ, Carl LC, Gray AW, Jastremski MS, Naylor DF, Rudis M, Spevetz A, Wedel SK, Horst M, Task Force of the American College of Critical Care Medicine, Society of Critical Care Medicine: Guidelines on critical care services and personnel: recommendations based on a system of categorization of three levels of care. Crit Care Med 2003, 31: 2677-2683. 10.1097/01.CCM.0000094227.89800.93 PubMedCrossRef
Qiu Y, Yu P: Nursing information systems: applying usability testing to assess the training needs for nursing students. Methods Inf Med 2007, 46: 416-419. PubMed
Johnson C, Zeiger R, Das AK, Goldstein M: Task analysis of writing hospital admission orders: evidence of a problem-based approach. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2006, 389-393.
Westbrook JI, Ampt A: Design, application and testing of the work observation method by activity timing (WOMBAT) to measure clinicians' patterns of work and communication. Int J Med Inform 2009, 78S: S25-S33. CrossRef
- Managing daily intensive care activities: An observational study concerning ad hoc decision making of charge nurses and intensivists
- BioMed Central
Neu im Fachgebiet AINS
Meistgelesene Bücher aus dem Fachgebiet AINS
Mail Icon II