Hello
everyone! Well, after a bit of a lull, it has turned out to be a very exciting
week in the research world for those of us involved in the UAB ER quality
improvement project! And, perhaps most exciting (at least for me anyway), is
that I FINALLY gained access to view the electronic medical record system so
I’m ready to rock and roll now!
Before this
point, we knew that we needed to measure changes in mental status in elderly
patients admitted to the emergency department, we just weren’t sure exactly how
to do that because there are so many different screening tools out there, but
surprisingly, not a lot of literature on using them especially with elderly
patients in an ER setting (which is why our research is so important and
groundbreaking J).
While
reading into what little research has already been published about our topic,
the main cognitive impairment screening tool that seemed to be used was the
Confusion Assessment Method (CAM), but the main problem with this tool is that
it is VERY subjective. Another screening tool that has been proven to be tried
and true is the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS), but this tool can
also be subjective. So, we started looking into more objective tests such as
the Six Item Screen (SIS) and the clock-drawing test, which is a very reliable
indicator of cognitive impairment. The only problem with the clock drawing test
was that there would be no way to enter the results into the electronic medical
system that UAB uses, so that screening tool had to be automatically excluded.
I think our
“ah-ha!” moment came after we finally came across an article that directly
related to our project (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3088375/),
and while reading the limitations of the study, we realized that we needed to
include both subjective and objective screening tools in our research project
to ensure accurate and reliable results. So, we have decided to use the CAM,
RASS, and the SIS cognitive screening tools for our project, and we have
created a data collection form to record our results of each as well as other
important patient information.
So next week begins my test run of
using these three tools congruently! While I am using each one, it will be
important for me to time how long it takes me to complete each assessment so
that we can see if they would be feasible to perform in a busy ER (and if they
are, then the data supporting this will make instituting them an easier sell).
This weekend I’ll be busy thoroughly studying how to use each screening method
so that by next week I’ll feel comfortable in real-life situations using them
and making modifications to our data collection sheet when needed. I do have to
say though, that I am a little nervous now that the time has finally come to
test our methods…worried I will mess something up or forget to record
something, or take too long performing the assessment, or not establish rapport
with the patients, or fall in front of a moving stretcher and cause a catastrophe
of epic proportions…if you haven’t picked up on my satire, I get extremely nervous before big things like
this (and public speaking, eeek!). Let’s pray that Murphy’s Law has no
jurisdiction at UAB’s ER!
As of now, we are one step closer in
discovering the most effective way to screen for mental status change at UAB
Hospital…and it’s starting with elderly patients in the emergency department!
Amid all of this excitement, I had another very important lesson learned this
week; sometimes the important thing isn’t having to know which direction you
(or your project) is moving in, but more often it’s simply having faith that
you (or your project) is moving.
Look forward to more exciting
updates next week as I blog about my first experiences actually implementing
our project out in…drumroll please…the real world!
