This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Background and Objective Shared decision-making (SDM) aligns patient preferences with health care team treatment goals. This quality improvement initiative implemented a standardized SDM bundle within a neurocritical care unit (NCCU), where unique demands make existing, provider-driven SDM practices challenging.
Methods An interprofessional team defined key issues, identified barriers, and created change ideas to drive implementation of an SDM bundle using the Institute for Healthcare Improvement Model for Improvement framework incorporating Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles. The SDM bundle included (1) a health care team huddle pre-SDM and post-SDM conversation; (2) a social worker–driven SDM conversation with the patient family, including core standardized communication elements to ensure consistency and quality; and (3) an SDM documentation tool within the electronic medical record to ensure the SDM conversation was accessible to all health care team members. The primary outcome measure was percentage of SDM conversations documented.
Results Documentation of SDM conversations improved by 56%, from 27% to 83% pre/postintervention. Average time to documentation decreased by 4 days, from day 9 preintervention to day 5 postintervention. There was no significant change in NCCU length of stay, nor did palliative care consultation rates increase. Postintervention, SDM team huddle compliance was 94.3%.
Discussion A team-driven, standardized SDM bundle that integrates with health care team workflows enabled SDM conversations to occur earlier and resulted in improved documentation of SDM conversations. Team-driven SDM bundles have the potential to improve communication and promote early alignment with patient family goals, preferences, and values.
Footnotes
Funding information and disclosures are provided at the end of the article. Full disclosure form information provided by the authors is available with the full text of this article at Neurology.org/cp.
Submitted and externally peer reviewed. The handling editor was Deputy Editor Kathryn Kvam, MD.
- Received May 12, 2022.
- Accepted November 1, 2022.
- © 2023 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
The Nerve!: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
You must ensure that your Disclosures have been updated within the previous six months. Please go to our Submission Site to add or update your Disclosure information.
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
