Patient perspectives on post-discharge surgical site infections: towards a patient-centered mobile health solution

Patrick C Sanger, Andrea Hartzler, Sarah M Han, Cheryl A L Armstrong, Mark R Stewart, Ross J Lordon, William B Lober, Heather L Evans, Patrick C Sanger, Andrea Hartzler, Sarah M Han, Cheryl A L Armstrong, Mark R Stewart, Ross J Lordon, William B Lober, Heather L Evans

Abstract

Background: Post-discharge surgical site infections (SSI) are a major source of morbidity, expense and anxiety for patients. However, patient perceptions about barriers experienced while seeking care for post-discharge SSI have not been assessed in depth. We explored patient experience of SSI and openness to a mobile health (mHealth) wound monitoring "app" as a novel solution to address this problem.

Methods: Mixed method design with semi-structured interviews and surveys. Participants were patients who had post-discharge surgical wound complications after undergoing operations with high risk of SSI, including open colorectal or ventral hernia repair surgery. The study was conducted at two affiliated teaching hospitals, including an academic medical center and a level 1 trauma center.

Results: From interviews with 13 patients, we identified 3 major challenges that impact patients' ability to manage post-discharge surgical wound complications, including required knowledge for wound monitoring from discharge teaching, self-efficacy for wound monitoring at home, and accessible communication with their providers about wound concerns. Patients found an mHealth wound monitoring application highly acceptable and articulated its potential to provide more frequent, thorough, and convenient follow-up that could reduce post-discharge anxiety compared to the current practice. Major concerns with mHealth wound monitoring were lack of timely response from providers and inaccessibility due to either lack of an appropriate device or usability challenges.

Conclusions: Our findings reveal gaps and frustrations with post-discharge care after surgery which could negatively impact clinical outcomes and quality of life. To address these issues, we are developing mPOWEr, a patient-centered mHealth wound monitoring application for patients and providers to collaboratively bridge the care transition between hospital and home.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1. Barriers and facilitators to coping…
Figure 1. Barriers and facilitators to coping with wound complications.
Ten sub-themes identified from patient interviews related to coping with post-discharge wound complications, organized into 3 major themes. The color distribution of each bar represents the number of participants who considered each sub-theme to be a barrier (red) or a facilitator (green). Grey indicates that the participant did not mention the sub-theme.
Figure 2. Comfort with mHealth application.
Figure 2. Comfort with mHealth application.
Participants' comfort with 4 key elements of a wound-tracking mHealth application. Based on 4 survey questions, participants were either “Very comfortable” (dark green), “Somewhat comfortable” (light green), “Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable (grey), or “Somewhat uncomfortable” (light red). No participants selected “Very uncomfortable”.

References

    1. Pinkney TD, Calvert M, Bartlett DC, Gheorghe A, Redman V, et al. (2013) Impact of wound edge protection devices on surgical site infection after laparotomy: multicentre randomised controlled trial (ROSSINI Trial). BMJ 347:f4305 10.1136/bmj.f4305
    1. Krieger BR, Davis DM, Sanchez JE, Mateka JJL, Nfonsam VN, et al. (2011) The use of silver nylon in preventing surgical site infections following colon and rectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 54:1014–1019 10.1097/DCR.0b013e31821c495d
    1. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR (1999) Guideline for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 1999. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 27:97–134 10.1016/S0196-6553(99)70088-X
    1. Daneman N, Lu H, Redelmeier DA (2010) Discharge after discharge: predicting surgical site infections after patients leave hospital. J Hosp Infect 75:188–194.
    1. Gibson A, Tevis S, Kennedy G (2013) Readmission after delayed diagnosis of surgical site infection: a focus on prevention using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Am J Surg. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.05.017
    1. Kazaure HS, Roman SA, Sosa JA (2012) Association of postdischarge complications with reoperation and mortality in general surgery. Arch Surg 147:1000–1007 10.1001/2013.jamasurg.114
    1. Zimlichman E, Henderson D, Tamir O, Franz C, Song P, et al. (2013) Health Care-Associated Infections: A Meta-analysis of Costs and Financial Impact on the US Health Care System. JAMA Intern Med. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.9763
    1. Limón E, Shaw E, Badia JM, Piriz M, Escofet R, et al. (2014) Post-discharge surgical site infections after uncomplicated elective colorectal surgery: impact and risk factors. The experience of the VINCat Program. J Hosp Infect 86:127–132 10.1016/j.jhin.2013.11.004
    1. Perencevich EN, Sands KE, Cosgrove SE, Guadagnoli E, Meara E, et al. (2003) Health and Economic Impact of Surgical Site Infections Diagnosed after Hospital Discharge. Emerg Infect Dis 9:196–203.
    1. Rhodes KV (2013) Completing the play or dropping the ball?: The case for comprehensive patient-centered discharge planning. JAMA Intern Med 173:1723–1724 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.7854
    1. Pieper B, Sieggreen M, Nordstrom CK, Freeland B, Kulwicki P, et al. (2007) Discharge knowledge and concerns of patients going home with a wound. J wound, ostomy, Cont Nurs 34: 245–53; quiz 254–5. doi: 10.1097/01.WON.0000270817.06942.00
    1. Tanner J, Padley W, Davey S (2012) Patient narratives of surgical site infection: implications for practice. J Hosp Infect 83:41–45 10.1016/j.jhin.2012.07.025
    1. Seaman M, Lammers R (1991) Inability of patients to self-diagnose wound infections. J Emerg Med 9:215–219.
    1. Sanger P, Hartzler A, Lober WB, Evans HL (2013) Provider needs assessment for mPOWEr: a Mobile tool for Post-Operative Wound Evaluation. Proc AMIA Annu Symp: 1236.
    1. Saunders RS, Fernandes-Taylor S, Rathouz PJ, Saha S, Wiseman JT, et al. (2014) Outpatient follow-up versus 30-day readmission among general and vascular surgery patients: A case for redesigning transitional care. Surgery 156:949–958 10.1016/j.surg.2014.06.041
    1. Klasnja P, Pratt W (2012) Healthcare in the pocket: mapping the space of mobile-phone health interventions. J Biomed Inform 45:184–198 10.1016/j.jbi.2011.08.017
    1. Pew (2013) Tracking for Health | Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project. Available: . Accessed: 2013 Nov 30.
    1. Pew (2013) Health Online 2013 | Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project. Available: . Accessed: 2013 Nov 30.
    1. Chell E (1998) Critical Incident Technique. In: Symon G, Cassell Ceditors. Qualitative Methods and Analysis in Organizational Research: A Practical Guide. London: Sage Publications. pp.51–72.
    1. Strauss A, Corbin J (1990) Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory— procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
    1. Cohen J (1960) A coefficient of agreement of nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 20:37–46 10.1177/001316446002000104
    1. Petherick ES, Dalton JE, Moore PJ, Cullum N (2006) Methods for identifying surgical wound infection after discharge from hospital: a systematic review. BMC Infect Dis 6:170 10.1186/1471-2334-6-170
    1. Haley RW (1995) The scientific basis for using surveillance and risk factor data to reduce nosocomial infection rates. J Hosp Infect 30 Suppl: 3–14
    1. Gaynes R, Richards C, Edwards J, Emori TG, Horan T, et al. (2001) Feeding back surveillance data to prevent hospital-acquired infections. Emerg Infect Dis 7:295–298 10.3201/eid0702.700295
    1. Hoch D, Ferguson T (2005) What I've learned from E-patients. PLoS Med 2:e206 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020206
    1. Stewart M, Brown JB, Donner A, McWhinney IR, Oates J, et al. (2000) The impact of patient-centered care on outcomes. J Fam Pract 49:796–804.
    1. Institute of Medicine (2001) Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington DC: National Academy Pr.
    1. Bilimoria K, Cella D, Butt Z (2014) Current Challenges in Using Patient-Reported Outcomes for Surgical Care and Performance Measurement: Everybody Wants to Hear From the Patient. JAMA Surg: In press. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.5285
    1. Sanger PC, Hartzler A, Lober WB, Evans HL, Pratt W (2014) Design Considerations for Post-Acute Care mHealth: Patient Perspectives. Proc AMIA Annu Symp: In press.

Source: PubMed

3
Subscribe