Premium
Toward Improving Quality of End‐of‐Life Care: Encoding Clinical Guidelines and Standing Orders Using the Omaha System
Author(s) -
Slipka Allison F.,
Monsen Karen A.
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
worldviews on evidence‐based nursing
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.052
H-Index - 49
eISSN - 1741-6787
pISSN - 1545-102X
DOI - 10.1111/wvn.12248
Subject(s) - snomed ct , psychological intervention , guideline , medicine , documentation , interoperability , end of life care , nursing , computer science , palliative care , world wide web , terminology , philosophy , linguistics , pathology , programming language
Background End‐of‐life care (EOLC) relieves the suffering of millions of people around the globe each year. A growing body of hospice care research has led to the creation of several evidence‐based clinical guidelines for EOLC. As evidence for the effectiveness of timely EOLC swells, so does the increased need for efficient information exchange between disciplines and across the care continuum. Aims The purpose of this study was to investigate the feasibility of using the Omaha System as a framework for encoding interoperable evidence‐based EOL interventions with specified temporality for use across disciplines and settings. Methods Four evidence‐based clinical guidelines and one current set of hospice standing orders were encoded using the Omaha System Problem Classification Scheme and Intervention Scheme, as well as Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine—Clinical Terms (SNOMED CT). The resulting encoded guideline was entered on a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet and made available for public use on the Omaha System Guidelines website. Results The resulting EOLC guideline consisted of 153 interventions that may enable patients and their surrogates, clinicians, and ancillary providers to communicate interventions in a universally comprehensible way. Linking Evidence to Action Evidence‐based interventions from diverse disciplines involved in EOLC are described within this guideline using the Omaha System. Because the Omaha System and clinical guidelines are maintained in the public domain, encoding interventions is achievable by anyone with access to the Internet and basic Excel skills. Using the guideline as a documentation template customized for unique patient needs, clinicians can quantify and track patient care across the care continuum to ensure timely evidence‐based interventions. Conclusions Clinical guidelines coded in the Omaha System can support the use of multidisciplinary evidence‐based interventions to improve quality of EOLC across settings and professions.