Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T00:20:53.999Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Implementation of an Electronic Travel Navigator to Enable "Identify-Isolate-Inform" for Emerging Infectious Diseases

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 November 2020

Sarimer Sanchez
Affiliation:
Massachusetts General Hospital
Eileen Searle
Affiliation:
Center for Disaster Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
David Rubins
Affiliation:
Brigham & Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
Sayon Dutta
Affiliation:
Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
Winston Ware
Affiliation:
Center for Quality and Safety, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Paul Biddinger
Affiliation:
Center for Disaster Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Erica Shenoy
Affiliation:
Massachusetts General Hospital
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Background: Travel screening can facilitate the identification of patients at risk for emerging infectious diseases, such as Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). A travel navigator with associated decision support through a best practice advisory (BPA) was implemented in an electronic health record to build upon the CDC identify-isolate-inform framework. Compliance with documentation of travel history, symptom screening when appropriate, and isolation of suspect MERS patients were assessed. Methods: Adult and pediatric emergency department encounters at the Massachusetts General Hospital, a 1,035-bed, tertiary-care, academic health center in Boston, Massachusetts, from August 2018 to October 2019, were included. We categorized an encounter as adherent to initial travel screening if providers answered foreign, domestic, or no travel to the screen. Encounters were defined as nonadherent if they were recorded as unknown or if an answer was not selected. Adherence to completion of data entry for the subgroup of patients with documented foreign travel was further assessed for region- and country-level specification, completion of symptom screen, and response to the MERS BPA (Fig. 1). Results: In total, 127,866 encounters were included, of which 105,593 (83%) were adherent to initial travel screening. Among 4,498 encounters with documented foreign travel, 2,970 (66%) specified the region of travel, and 710 (16%) selected a country of travel from the listing. Moreover, 214 encounters had documented travel to the Middle East. Selection of Middle East or 1 of the 13 countries identified by the CDC as at risk for MERS triggered symptom screening for fever and cough, which was performed in 139 encounters (65%). Of these, 95 encounters documented absence of fever and cough, 15 documented fever and cough, 12 documented a cough alone, and 17 documented a fever alone through reporting or obtaining vitals. The MERS BPA was triggered in 37 encounters; 10 patients were ordered for isolation using the BPA. Of these, 4 patients met CDC criteria for a MERS patient under investigation and were tested; all were negative. Conclusions: Initial screening to document foreign travel is completed at a high rate; however, use of the travel navigator to specify region and country, key components necessary to prompt clinicians for symptom screening, are documented in a minority of encounters. Future interventions are needed to improve region and country capture and appropriate symptom screening, with isolation when appropriate.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Type
Poster Presentations
Copyright
© 2020 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved.