1

VitalPAC: a means of hospital-wide physiological surveillance?

SPSRN Burn June 2009Nicola Mackintosh

2

Outline

Context & project overview

The nature of the problem, ‘failure to rescue’ and the proposed safety solution – VitalPAC

What could be the problem with the solution?

Examining the potential for unintended consequences

3

Research Context Context: Innovations Programme / NIHR King’s PSSQ Research

Centre Project: two year study examining the management of complications

in medicine and maternity in four wards of two foundation trusts Methods: ethnography (observations, interviews, documentary

review, analysis of routine data) Focus:

How is deterioration socially framed, negotiated and managed? How have safety strategies such as VitalPAC been adopted and

what is their impact? What contextual features facilitate ‘mindful’ application of these

tools?

4

Background Policy Context

Widespread evidence of ‘failure to rescue’ i.e. failure not only to recognise warning signs, but to interpret and institute timely, appropriate clinical management once deterioration is identified (NCEPOD 2005, NPSA 2007, O’Neill 2008).

Up to 50% of ward based patients received substandard care prior to ICU admission; up to 41% of ICU admissions were potentially avoidable (McQuillan 1998)

Deterioration in a patient’s condition identified by WHO as a key topic (Joint Commission 2008)

5

Latent Failures & Error Producing Conditions (NPSA 2007)Work/environment factors e.g. lack

of guidelines, lack of training

Team factors e.g. hierarchies

Individual (staff) factors e.g. inadequate handover

Task factors e.g. observations rated as low priority

Patient factors e.g. signs of deterioration not always visually obvious

Failure to detect, interpret and respond to the deteriorating patient

6

Safety Solutions

Early recognition e.g. Early Warning Scores (EWS), intelligent assessment tools such as ‘VitalPAC’

Graded response strategy for those at risk

Access to personnel with core critical care competencies and diagnostic skills e.g. Medical Emergency Team, Critical Care Outreach Service

Education and training / core competencies in monitoring, measuring, interpreting and responding e.g. Immediate Life Support Training

7

Early Warning Scores

EWS operate by allotting points to vital sign measurements on basis of physiological derangement from a ‘predetermined range’

When score reaches an arbitrarily predefined threshold it triggers ‘call for help’

To date the extent to which the existing tools are valid or reliable predictors of deterioration is unknown (McGaughey et al 2007)

8

VitalPAC – the rationale

VitalPAC (intelligent assessment tool) – may facilitate appropriate graded medical response based on the severity of the condition of the patient. Alerts preset and linked to a central surveillance system; designing out variability in practitioners’ responses to the information

9

VitalPAC – the process

10

VitalPAC – potential for reduction of risks?

Task Accurate and legible recording of data Individualised practice Correct ascription of weighted value according to physiological

derangement; arithmetic addition of weighted values to form EWS

Team Remote access to aid medical prioritisation when medical team

‘offsite’ License to overcome professional hierarchies Point of reference for junior staff

11

VitalPAC – opportunity for performance feedback?

12

VitalPAC – evidence of impact? Key questions – does VP trigger remedial actions at the right time?

Does it reduce rates of ‘failure to rescue’? Does it reduce avoidable adverse events or death?

Little empirical research to date Absence of data examining impact of VP on patient outcome EWS error rate of 28.6% compared to 9.5% with VP (Prytherch 2006) Even with track and trigger systems recording of vital signs, patient

chart completion and RRT activation remains sub-optimal (Hillman et al 2005)

13

Potential Problems With The Solution?

‘Technological determinism’ (Webster 2007) underpins rationale for the tool

Ignores technology’s capability as ‘one actor among many in changing configurations of social and technical elements’ (Law and Hassard 1999)

Considers redundancy as a problem to be solved rather than recognising duplication of effort in recording data as source of reliability (Tjora and Scambler 2008)

14

Boundaries Of Risk Tool focuses on individual behaviour; system design

failures are marginalised. Inadequate staffing levels, inappropriate skill mix, high workload

known to impact on levels of surveillance, sensitivity to warning signs and capacity to respond to an emergency (Carr-Hill et al 2003)

Inbuilt algorithm designed to influence nurses’ behaviour – may have little impact on regulation of medical response

Disjuncture regarding chain of command - observations performed by care assistant; initiation of appropriate escalation strategy by qualified staff

15

Claiming Authority And Jurisdiction Over A Contested Field Potential for technology to serve as tool to

demonstrate power, professional skills and decision making

VitalPAC could provide opportunity for boundary work; may enable nurses to gain authority and ‘symbolic capital’ – improving social position (Gieryn 1999, Bourdieu 1998)

16

Potential Unintended Consequences (1)

System failure – information inaccessible

Impact of remote access on interprofessional collaboration – removal of ‘key material structuring device’ and the face to face communication that often happens around the ward round (Greenhalgh 2008)

Apprenticeship – difficult for novices to develop key assessment skills

Impact on work practices: increase in workload due to loss of ‘batching’ of observations, difficulties accessing computers during busy times e.g. ward rounds

17

Potential Unintended Consequences (2) Overdue observations? Normalisation of deviance – departures from

safety system that get recast as acceptable risk and become the norm (Vaughan 1996)

Devaluation of tacit knowledge and merit of subjective data in defining patients at risk

Necessity for pragmatism, application of contingent standards when staff decide to over-ride the system e.g. around end of life care and chronic illness - increasing the margin for error

Colonisation - staff controlled by the very ICT installed to facilitate working routines; ‘symbolic violence’ (Habermas 1987, Bourdieu 1977)

Routinisation Construction of hierarchy of importance of vital signs according to

attribution of weighted value

18

‘Medical Gaze’

Technology of power - ‘e-panopticon’ (Foucault 1976)

‘The patient is rendered as a universalised datum, disconnected from both any tangible, corporeal body and the sentient human being, becoming an image that can be moved through computer networks anywhere around the world. Understanding such a patient does not require human touch’ (Samson 1999)

19

The Tool As A means Of Surveillance

Software warns if erroneous values are entered

The system flags up when partial data consistently entered or ‘unlikely observations’ entered or the same data regularly recorded

Aggregated data can provide an overview of the health status of the hospital patient population

Opportunities for performance monitoring / score cards

Medico-legal and clinical negligence implications

20

Operationalising New Modes of Surveillance

Interpretation of numerical data becomes the mode of framing generalisable knowledge about social phenomena (May 2006)

Performance management can become an organisational ritual, ‘a dramaturgical performance’ (Power 1997)

Opportunities for blame of particular professional groups

21

Summary

Codifying and standardising ‘the indeterminancy of expert systems and knowledge will have limited effect in practice’ (Webster 2007)

Important to capture how the tool ‘mediates’ practice and influences pragmatic decision making