Towards improving hospital workflows: An evaluation of resources to mobilize patients

Brent C. Pottenger, Peter J. Pronovost, Julie Kreif, Lisa Klein, Deborah Hobson, Daniel Young, Erik Hans Hoyer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Aim: To characterize resources to safely mobilize different types of hospitalized patients. Background: Current approaches to determine nurse–patient ratios do not always include information regarding the specific demands of patients who require extra resources to mobilize. Workflows must be designed with knowledge of resource requirements to integrate patient mobility into the daily nursing team care plan. Methods: Nurse-led mobility sessions were evaluated on two adult hospital units, which consisted of nurse–patient encounters focused on patient mobility only. The resources assessed for each session were time-to-mobilize patient, time-to-document, need for additional staff support, and the need for assistive devices. Mobility sessions were also categorized by patient ambulation status, level of mobility limitations (low, medium and high) and diagnosis. Results: In 212 total mobility sessions, the median time-to-mobilize and time-to-document were 7.75 and 1.27 min, respectively. Additional staff support was required for 87% and 92% of patients with medium and high mobility limitations, respectively. All patients with low mobility limitations ambulated, and only 14% required additional staff. Ambulating patients with high mobility limitations was the most time-intensive (median 12.55 min). Ambulating stroke patients required one additional staff and an assistive device in 92% and 69% of the sessions, respectively. Conclusion: This study describes the resources associated with mobilizing inpatients with different levels of mobility impairments and diagnoses. Implications for Nursing Management: These results could assist nursing management with facilitating appropriate daily nurse–patient ratios and justify the need for assistive devices and staff support to safely mobilize patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Nursing Management
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Workflow
Mobility Limitation
Self-Help Devices
Nursing
Patient Care Planning
Hospital Units
Walking
Inpatients
Stroke
Nurses

Keywords

  • exercise
  • functional status
  • health resources
  • mobility limitation
  • mobilization

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Leadership and Management

Cite this

Towards improving hospital workflows : An evaluation of resources to mobilize patients. / Pottenger, Brent C.; Pronovost, Peter J.; Kreif, Julie; Klein, Lisa; Hobson, Deborah; Young, Daniel; Hoyer, Erik Hans.

In: Journal of Nursing Management, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Pottenger, Brent C. ; Pronovost, Peter J. ; Kreif, Julie ; Klein, Lisa ; Hobson, Deborah ; Young, Daniel ; Hoyer, Erik Hans. / Towards improving hospital workflows : An evaluation of resources to mobilize patients. In: Journal of Nursing Management. 2018.
@article{863afaf5405e4a3e935c12a675289cca,
title = "Towards improving hospital workflows: An evaluation of resources to mobilize patients",
abstract = "Aim: To characterize resources to safely mobilize different types of hospitalized patients. Background: Current approaches to determine nurse–patient ratios do not always include information regarding the specific demands of patients who require extra resources to mobilize. Workflows must be designed with knowledge of resource requirements to integrate patient mobility into the daily nursing team care plan. Methods: Nurse-led mobility sessions were evaluated on two adult hospital units, which consisted of nurse–patient encounters focused on patient mobility only. The resources assessed for each session were time-to-mobilize patient, time-to-document, need for additional staff support, and the need for assistive devices. Mobility sessions were also categorized by patient ambulation status, level of mobility limitations (low, medium and high) and diagnosis. Results: In 212 total mobility sessions, the median time-to-mobilize and time-to-document were 7.75 and 1.27 min, respectively. Additional staff support was required for 87{\%} and 92{\%} of patients with medium and high mobility limitations, respectively. All patients with low mobility limitations ambulated, and only 14{\%} required additional staff. Ambulating patients with high mobility limitations was the most time-intensive (median 12.55 min). Ambulating stroke patients required one additional staff and an assistive device in 92{\%} and 69{\%} of the sessions, respectively. Conclusion: This study describes the resources associated with mobilizing inpatients with different levels of mobility impairments and diagnoses. Implications for Nursing Management: These results could assist nursing management with facilitating appropriate daily nurse–patient ratios and justify the need for assistive devices and staff support to safely mobilize patients.",
keywords = "exercise, functional status, health resources, mobility limitation, mobilization",
author = "Pottenger, {Brent C.} and Pronovost, {Peter J.} and Julie Kreif and Lisa Klein and Deborah Hobson and Daniel Young and Hoyer, {Erik Hans}",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/jonm.12644",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Nursing Management",
issn = "0966-0429",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Towards improving hospital workflows

T2 - An evaluation of resources to mobilize patients

AU - Pottenger, Brent C.

AU - Pronovost, Peter J.

AU - Kreif, Julie

AU - Klein, Lisa

AU - Hobson, Deborah

AU - Young, Daniel

AU - Hoyer, Erik Hans

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Aim: To characterize resources to safely mobilize different types of hospitalized patients. Background: Current approaches to determine nurse–patient ratios do not always include information regarding the specific demands of patients who require extra resources to mobilize. Workflows must be designed with knowledge of resource requirements to integrate patient mobility into the daily nursing team care plan. Methods: Nurse-led mobility sessions were evaluated on two adult hospital units, which consisted of nurse–patient encounters focused on patient mobility only. The resources assessed for each session were time-to-mobilize patient, time-to-document, need for additional staff support, and the need for assistive devices. Mobility sessions were also categorized by patient ambulation status, level of mobility limitations (low, medium and high) and diagnosis. Results: In 212 total mobility sessions, the median time-to-mobilize and time-to-document were 7.75 and 1.27 min, respectively. Additional staff support was required for 87% and 92% of patients with medium and high mobility limitations, respectively. All patients with low mobility limitations ambulated, and only 14% required additional staff. Ambulating patients with high mobility limitations was the most time-intensive (median 12.55 min). Ambulating stroke patients required one additional staff and an assistive device in 92% and 69% of the sessions, respectively. Conclusion: This study describes the resources associated with mobilizing inpatients with different levels of mobility impairments and diagnoses. Implications for Nursing Management: These results could assist nursing management with facilitating appropriate daily nurse–patient ratios and justify the need for assistive devices and staff support to safely mobilize patients.

AB - Aim: To characterize resources to safely mobilize different types of hospitalized patients. Background: Current approaches to determine nurse–patient ratios do not always include information regarding the specific demands of patients who require extra resources to mobilize. Workflows must be designed with knowledge of resource requirements to integrate patient mobility into the daily nursing team care plan. Methods: Nurse-led mobility sessions were evaluated on two adult hospital units, which consisted of nurse–patient encounters focused on patient mobility only. The resources assessed for each session were time-to-mobilize patient, time-to-document, need for additional staff support, and the need for assistive devices. Mobility sessions were also categorized by patient ambulation status, level of mobility limitations (low, medium and high) and diagnosis. Results: In 212 total mobility sessions, the median time-to-mobilize and time-to-document were 7.75 and 1.27 min, respectively. Additional staff support was required for 87% and 92% of patients with medium and high mobility limitations, respectively. All patients with low mobility limitations ambulated, and only 14% required additional staff. Ambulating patients with high mobility limitations was the most time-intensive (median 12.55 min). Ambulating stroke patients required one additional staff and an assistive device in 92% and 69% of the sessions, respectively. Conclusion: This study describes the resources associated with mobilizing inpatients with different levels of mobility impairments and diagnoses. Implications for Nursing Management: These results could assist nursing management with facilitating appropriate daily nurse–patient ratios and justify the need for assistive devices and staff support to safely mobilize patients.

KW - exercise

KW - functional status

KW - health resources

KW - mobility limitation

KW - mobilization

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85052633900&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85052633900&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/jonm.12644

DO - 10.1111/jonm.12644

M3 - Article

C2 - 30117210

AN - SCOPUS:85052633900

JO - Journal of Nursing Management

JF - Journal of Nursing Management

SN - 0966-0429

ER -