Title: AAC in the ICU: Critical Issues and Preliminary Research
1AAC in the ICU Critical Issues and Preliminary
Research
- Mary Beth Happ, Ph.D., R.N.
- Kathryn Garrett, Ph.D., CCC-SLP
- Tricia Roesch, B.S.N., R.N.
-
- School of Nursing University of Pittsburgh
- Duquesne University, Pittsburgh PA
ASHA Convention November 2003 Chicago
2(No Transcript)
3Overview
- Part I Literature Review
- Part II Feasibility study of electronic
- VOCAs in the Surgical Otolaryngology Unit
- and Case Example
- Part III Feasibility study of electronic
- VOCAs in the Medical Intensive Care Unit
- Part IV NIH-funded Intervention Study -- The
SPEACS Project
4Note
- Please refer to the Microsoft Word document by
the same title for a narrative version of this
presentation - The Word document will also contain the reference
list.
5Part I Background
6Descriptive reports of the mechanical ventilation
experience in the ICU
- Patients experience
- FEAR
- PANIC
- STRESS
- As a result of the inability to speak
7- Nurse-Patient communication in ICU
- Brief (lt 5 min), task-oriented, commands
reassurances during physical care.
8- Patients typically communicate with nods,
gestures, and mouthing words.
9- ICU interactions do NOT usually involve
- communication of the patients ideas,
- patients initiation of messages or elaboration.
10- Communication difficulty with mechanically
ventilated (MV) patients - related to illness
severity, anger - (Menzel, 1998)
- Greater difficulty communicating with family than
with nurses - (Menzel, 1998)
- Under-recognition high levels of pain reported
in MV patients (SUPPORT studies) - RNs/MDs more likely to communicate with patients
who are more responsive. -
11- Statement of the Problem
- Few data-based communication intervention studies
with acutely/critically ill adults have been
published - (Dowden et al, 1986 Stovsky et al, 1988)
- Alphabet picture boards preferred by a critical
care survivors (n5) (Fried-Oken et al, 1991)
12- Clinical case reports
- Introducing AAC preoperatively word banking
(Costello, 2000) - Multidisciplinary post-operative AAC plans for
head and neck cancer patients (Fox Rau, 2001) - Descriptions of AAC use in ICU (Fried-Oken,
2001)
13A need exists for
- Specific data on communication interventions for
nonspeaking, intensive care unit patients - Analysis of high tech versus low tech
interventions - Perceptual, qualitative, and quantitative
analyses - Comparisons between different ICU populations
- Usage data as well as interactional data
14General Design of 2 Feasibility Studies
15Purpose
- Explore the feasibility of electronic voice
output communication aids (VOCAs) for use with
nonvocal patients - in a medical ICU and
- following head-neck cancer surgery.
16Research Questions
17What are the
- Patient characteristics (illness severity,
neuromotor ability) - Usage patterns (message categories, frequency,
assistance required) - Communication quality (ease, satisfaction)
- Barriers to communication
- when VOCAs are used by hospitalized adults?
18Complementary Design
QUAL quan
No hypotheses
Purposive-theoretical sampling
Small samples
Morgan, 1998
19Settings University of Pittsburgh Medical
Center - Otolaryngology surgical unit - Medical
ICU 20 beds
- Entry Criteria
- Respiratory intubation
- Responsive to verbal stimuli
- Follows commands consistently
- Initial Cognitive-Linguistic Screen
-
- Dowden, Honsinger Beukelman, 1986
20Procedures
21Education Set-Up
- Nurse Inservice (15 min)
- Patient Instruction (20 min) reinforcement
- Message Inventories
- What does he/she want to say?
- To whom?
- How?
Costello, 2000
22Data Collection
- Enrollment
- Pre-test Ease of Communication Scale2
- APACHE, Motor Screen1
- Daily
- Observations (20min)
- Chart Review
- Extubation
- Post-test Ease of Communication Scale2
- Exit Interviews
1. P. Dowden et al. (1986)
2 L.. Menzel (1998).
23Part II
- Pilot Research
- Head and Neck Surgical Unit
24Funding AACN/ Sigma Theta Tau ONS Foundation/
OrthoBiotech
Mentorship/Consultation Dr. Richard Hurtig,
University of Iowa Stephanie Williams, SLP,
Dynavox Systems, Inc
- Equipment donations
- DynaVox Systems, Inc.
- WordsPlus, Inc.
- AbleNet
25TM
DynaMyte
Electronic VOCAs
Message Mate
TM
26Examples of Patient
Message Screens
DynaMyteTM
271
NAUSEA
Say
SICK
Im OK
Pain shot
PAIN
MEDICINE
NOT OK
2
Back Space
HOT
COLD
SAD
HAPPY
ANGRY
AFRAID
HUNGRY
TIRED
3
Clear
MOUTH CARE
TV
BATH
DRINK
BEDPAN
SUCTION
MUSIC
GLASSES
4
I LOVE YOU
Repeat
WHY? WHERE?
NURSE
DOCTOR
FAMILY
HOME
TIME
HEAR
MessageMateTM
MY MOUTH
CAT
DOG
28Basic Messages
- Pain
- Shortness of Breath
- Suction
- Help!
- Hot/Cold
- Home/Family
- Anxiety/Worry
29pole
swivel arm
30Qualitative Data Analysis
- Fieldnotes and interviews coded for
- method
- content
- barriers
- facilitators
31Quantitative Data Analysis
- Descriptive statistics (dispersion)
- Pattern recognition
- Nonparametric within case comparison (EOC)
32RESULTS
33Study 1 Exploring the Feasiblity of VOCAs with
Head and Neck Cancer Patients Following Surgery
MB. Happ1 S. Kagan2 T. Roesch1 E. Holmes1
1 University of Pittsburgh School of Nursing 2
University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing
Funding ONS Foundation/OrthoBiotech
34Head Neck Sample(n10)
- 7 men, 3 women
- all Caucasian
- 5 MessageMate
- 5 DynaMyte
35Observation Interview
- Observations 66
- Communication Events 50 (75.8)
-
- Formal Interviews 9
- Patient 8
- Nurse 1
36Characteristics (n10)
- Ages 45-82 yrs (57.112.8)
- Education 12-20 yrs (13.52.9)
- Computer Use 7
- minimal level 3/7
37- Procedures
- Brachytherapy 2
- Laryngectomy 8
38Characteristics (cont).
- Days w/ device 3-24 (9.1 6.2)
- Post-op days prior
- to device 1-6 (1.9.1.6)
- APACHE III 5-53 (27.113.2)
39Neuromotor Characteristics
- Motor Screen Tasks 10
- Write legibly 10
- Narcotics/sedation 35/50 (70)
40Usage Patterns
- VOCAs were used by some of the post surgical
patients - - some required extensive assistance, whereas
others required limited or no assistance - Other modalities were used as well
- -Writing
- - Gesture
- - Mouthing Words
- - Head Nods
41Other findings
- Of the observed communication events in which
patients utilized the VOCA, patients initiated
more frequently than a historical
(no-intervention) group. - a slight increase in ease of communication was
observed in the VOCA group when compared with a
historical (no-intervention) group.
42Novel Scenarios in which VOCAS were used
- Cardiology evaluation
- Telephone usage
43What were the barriers to device use?
- device out-of-reach
- upper extremity neck wounds
- blurred vision
- insufficient staff training in use
- patient preference for writing or other method
44Message Content
- Comfort needs (pain, thirst, suction)
- Questions about home family
- I love you ?
- Questions about tests and condition
- Phone conversations
45Characteristics of the head and neck patient
population that may have been associated with
successful AAC device use
- All were able to write
- All were liberated from ventilator
- Voicelessness was expected
- More independence
46 47Tim
- 46 year old Caucasian male
- S/P Total laryngectomy tooth extraction
- No prior history of intubation and mechanical
ventilation - No significant past medical history
48Tim
- High school graduate
- Previous personal computer use
- Vision corrected with eyeglasses
- Right hand dominance
49Tim
- Motor screening tasks
- APACHE score 29
- Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) 15
50Enrollment
- Immediate post operative phase
- Transferred from Medical Intensive Care Unit
(MICU) to Head and Neck ICU - Patient appeared withdrawn
- Deferred until third post operative day
- just dont feel like it
- No device training prior to study enrollment
51Device Set Up
- Device options
- Message Mate- simple, smaller message capacity
- DynaMyte- larger capacity, multi-level message
display - At bedside
- Duration 1.5 hours
- Initial method of communication
- Writing/Gestures
52Tims Requests
- Voice selection
- Message deletions
- Yes/No
- What time is it?
- Message Additions
- Hello Good-bye
53Tims Requests
- Icon/Message change
- Performed at bedside
- Requested by patient and/or family
- During entire enrollment period
- Affect change
54Observation of Communication Events (OCEs)
- 7 OCEs from 5 study days
- Narcotic analgesia
- 5/7 OCEs
- Additional non-AAC methods
- Head Nods
- Hand Gestures
55Tims AAC Use
- Most utilized mode
- Keyboard feature
- Utilized bilateral hands predominantly index
fingers and thumb - 6 available pop-up icons with additional
methods - Effective navigation
56General Interactions with AAC Use
- Convey feelings to nurse
- Pain
- Anxiety
- Establishing need for suctioning
- Requesting assistance in bathing
- Communication with RNs, MDs, family
57Aspects of AAC Use
58Feedback
- Tim
- I can say everything I want to say right now
through typing VOCA and writing. - I am satisfied with the way I communicate in the
hospital. - Tims Sister
- Patients need this device until prosthesis is in
place. It is a great help.
59Practical Challenges
- Patient lost access to the device when he
transferred off of the Head and Neck Unit (to
Cardiology) - Expensive
- Nursing, Physician, Clinician unfamiliarity
- Battery back up
- Infection control issue -- how to keep the device
sterile - Discharge to home without device?
60Tim Taught Us
- Communication method needs to be customized for
each patient - Options for changes/deletions of various messages
at all times - Once a method is established, it is difficult to
change or add another method
61Results of this exploratory study will be
submitted for publication.
- Stay tunedyou will be able to access more
specific data after the manuscript has been
accepted to a peer-reviewed journal.
62Part III
- Pilot Study 2 -- Medical Intensive Care Unit
(MICU)
63Exploring the Feasiblity of VOCAs with
Nonspeaking ICU Patients
M.B. Happ, PhD T. K. Roesch, BSN
64MICU Sample(n11)
- 15 patients identified
- 11 participated (73)
- 7 men, 4 women
- 10 Caucasian
65Observation Interview
- Observations 49
- Communication Events 41 (83.7)
-
- Formal Interviews 14
- Patient 8
- Family 3
- Clinician 3
66Characteristics (n11)
- Ages 20-72 yrs (45.516)
- Education 0-16 yrs (131.9)
- Computer Use 6
MR patient excluded from mean
67Characteristics
- Intubation
- Tracheostomy 4
- Oral ET tube 7
- Primary Medical Dx
- Pneumonia/ARDS/Sepsis 7
- Lung CA 1
- COPD 1
- Subglottic Stenosis 1
- SCI 1
68Characteristics (cont).
- Days w/ device 1-14 (5.7 4.6)
- Ventilator Days 1-44 (15.512.2)
- APACHE III 10-54 (27.516.1)
69Neuromotor Characteristics (n11 Study
Patients)
- Motor Screen Tasks 8
- - Blind, quadriplegia
- - Quadriplegia
- Morbid Obesity
- Write legibly 3
70Neuromotor Characteristics(n49 observations)
- Narcotic analgesia 13 (26.5)
- Anxiolytics/sedation 22 (44.9)
71Usage Patterns
- Ventilated patients in the MICU used VOCA systems
in over 1/4 of the observed communication events - However, usage patterns ranged from limited to
required cues to use. - Most of the patients used more than one
communication method - Increased patient initiations were associated
with availability of the VOCA
72Observed VOCA Messages
- I love you ? 9
- FAQs (go home, restraints, breathing
tube) 4 - Anxiety/worry/ fear 4
- Pain 3
- Comfort (thirst, position, cold) 3
- Family 1
73Novel Scenarios in which MICU patients used VOCAs
to communicate
- Informed consent to participate in research
diagnostic testing - Semantically complex message building
- Patient initiated messages
- What is your religion?
- Is the house clean?
- I want my sister!
74Quality
- Patient ratings of Ease of Communication
increased significantly in the VOCA versus no
VOCA (pretreatment) condition.
75Anecdotal Reports of Satisfaction
- That VOCA was a good thing there, it really
helped me. (patient) - It was easier to understand what she wanted. I
cant read sign languageIm not a good guesser.
(husband) - I think its more complete and decisive. (RN)
76Satisfaction
- Whenthey patients got the hang of this, they
used it almost as a sole means of communication.
They like this and they like the fact that people
tend to respond to voice. And this was their
voice. - RN - People dont communicate with people who dont
communicate back. - RN
77Satisfaction
- Suggested Design Improvements
- Larger screens
- Greater touch sensitivity
- Easier keyboard access (DynaMyte)
- Simplier less expandable (DynaMyte)
- Realtime Tracking/Storage of Messages
- Backlighting (MessageMate)
78Barriers
- poor positioning/out-of-reach
- UE weakness
- blurred vision
- fluctuating cognition/attention
- deterioration in condition
79Barriers
- Staff time constraints
- Lack of knowledge about device
- Device complexity
80Barriers
- It was easier for me to talk with him, and not
have to pull out the device, because time is
precious around here Where he could get his
point across to me with lip talking, it seemed to
lessen the time - RN
81Partner Behaviors that Facilitated VOCA use
- Cueing patients in selection of messages
- Repositioning patient or device
- Aids glasses, hearing, access tools
- Patience with slow message generation
- Improved condition and UE strength
82What we learned about AAC
- Start simple
- Basic instruction card
- SLP support
- Tech support
- Partner training
83What we learned about AAC
- Use progressive, expandable techniques
- Capitalize on combined methods
- Cueing
- Consistency
- Repeat instructions
84For further information and specific data from
Study 2
- Keep an eye out for the following article
- Happ, M.B., Roesch, T.K., Garrett, K.L. (in
press --expected 2004). Exploring the use of
electronic VOCAs in the medical intensive care
unit. Heart Lung, 33, issue 2 or 3.
85Part IVIntroduction to theSPEACS Project
86Time for a large-scale study
- A large n study across multiple ICU units
- Planned prospective design with 3 patient/nurse
cohorts - Treatment A systematically designed AAC and
basic communication intervention package
implemented by nurses and an SLP - Quantitative analysis of the INTERACTIONS between
the nonspeaking patient AND the primary nurse
caregiver
87SPEACS
- Study of Patient-Nurse Effectiveness with
Assisted Communication Strategies
88Multidisciplinary Research Team
- Mary Beth Happ, Ph.D., R.N.
- Kathryn Garrett, Ph.D., CCC-SLP
- Susan Sereika, Ph.D.
- Elisabeth George, Ph.D., R.N.
- Michael Donahoe, M.D.
- Judith Tate, M.S., R.N.
-
- School of Nursing University of Pittsburgh
- Duquesne University
- University of Pittsburgh Medical Center
Expert consultants Maria Connolly, B.S.,R.N. --
Loyola University Melanie Fried-Oken, Ph.D.,
CCC-SLP -- OHSU Neville Strumpf, Ph.D., R.N. --
U. of Penn
895-Year Funding (2003 -- 2008) National
Institute of Child Health and Human Development
(NICHHD) Improving
Communication with Nonspeaking Patients in the
ICU (R01-HD043988-01)
90Overview
- Background and Rationale
- Research Questions Study Aims
- Research Design Model
- Independent Variables Description of 2-Phase
Intervention Packages - Procedures
- Dependent Variables/Data Collection
- Data Analysis
- Potential Challenges
- Invitation to Comment
91Definition of Augmentative Alternative
Communication (AAC)
- All communication methods that supplement
natural speech including unaided (signing,
vocalizations) or aided (writing, typing,
electronic device) techniques - - from Beukelman Mirenda, 1998
92Natural Approaches
- Mouthing words
- Writing
- Gesture
93(No Transcript)
94- Natural, minimally aided communication strategies
are the most frequently used by nonspeaking
patients in the ICU. - Typically, AAC devices are not available.
- Problems with relying on natural communication
alone can include - Mouthing Patients often cannot clearly mouth
words around the endotracheal tube - Writing Paper/pen is not made available, the
patient is illiterate, or upper extremity
function is inadequate - Gestures Patients/nurses have no consistently
shared gestural lexicon (Connolly, 1992) - Opportunities Patients do not receive adequate
opportunities to initiate their own topics and
messages (e.g., Please find my reading glasses) - Rate Message co-construction can be a slow
process
95Prosthetic Oral Approaches
- Electrolarynx
- Tracheostomy one-way speaking valve
96Aided StrategiesLow tech symbol boards/direct
selection
97TM
Electronic VOCAs synthesized or digitized
voice output symbolized messages multiple
level option scanning option
DynaMyte
Message Mate
TM
98(No Transcript)
99Challenges
- AAC is not considered customary care
- Nurses do not have easy access to AAC
technologies - Nurses do not receive training in their use
- Natural communication strategies and/or AAC
technologies are not applied systematically to
all conscious ICU patients - Communication strategies are not individualized
for specific patients - Ongoing consultation about communication
strategies typically is not available for nurses
in the ICU
100SPEACS
- Study of Patient-Nurse Effectiveness with
Assisted Communication Strategies
101RQ/Specific Aim 1
- What is the impact of two experimental
interventions - Basic Communication Skills Training (BCST) for
nurses - AAC techniques and education individualized SLP
consultation - (AAC-SLP)
- on ease, quality, frequency and success of
nurse-patient communication?
102RQ/Specific Aim 2
- How do interactions in the two communication
intervention conditions (BCST and AAC-SLP)
compare with those in a control (usual care)
cohort?
103Research Model
104Happ, M.B. Garrett, K.L. (2003)
105Our HYPOTHESIS
- AAC-SLP gt BCST gt Control on
- ease
- quality
- frequency
- successfulness
- of nurse-patient communication interactions.
106Research Design
107Nonconcurrent Cohort Designwith Repeated Measures
Year 2 BCST X1T1 T2 T3 T4
Year 3 AAC-SLP X2T1 T2 T3 T4
Year 1 Control T1 T2 T3 T4
1082 Settings
- Medical ICU
- Cardiothoracic ICU
-
109Independent Variables
110Condition 1 - Usual Treatment
- No specific communication training for nurses
- Communication interaction and intervention at the
discretion of the patient or untrained nurses
111Condition 2 -- BCST
- Training for nurses in basic communication skills
prior to data collection - Delivery
- 2 hour inservice (instruction roleplay) with
SLP lt2 months prior to data collection - Website consistently available
112Sample Basic Communication Skills
- Approach patient
- Alert patient (George)
- Tag yes/no questions (Yesor No?)
- Provide auditory or written choices
- Ask open-ended questions when appropriate (Tell
me whats on your mind.) - Instruct patients to use specific natural
modalities if they do not initiate - Show me one of the gestures we talked about.
- Write it for me.
- Can you mouth the words more clearly?
- Interpret utterances/mirror gestures
113Condition 3 -- AAC SLP
- Incorporates basic communication skills training
- SLP also works with nurse to develop
individualized communication intervention plan
for each patient. - SLP also sets up AAC technologies, conducts
message inventory, teaches patient, and trains
nurse as appropriate - SLP is available on an ongoing basis to consult
with nurse about communication
114Nurse Sample (quasi-random selection)
- 5 RNs/unit 10 RNs x 3 phases
- 30 RNs
- RN Entry Criteria
- 1-year critical care experience
- Full-time staff, not permanent night
- Selected from pool of volunteers
115Patient Sample
- 3 pts/RN 30 pts x 3 phases
- 90 patients
- Patient Entry Criteria
- Respiratory intubation
- Likely to remain intubated for a min of 48 hrs
- Understand English
- Glasgow Coma Scale gt 13
-
- Exclusion
- Premorbid inability to communicate verbally or
nonverbally (a score of lt3 on the NOMS
cognition, expressive, and receptive language
subscales - Delirium or limited movement OK
116Dependent Variables
117Data Sources
- Transcriptions of videorecorded nurse-patient
interactions - 3 minute segments -- 2x/day for 2 days for each
nurse/patient dyad - Observer ratings
- Field Notes
- Clinical record/chart
118- Videotapes of the 2-minute nurse/patient
interactions will be transcribed and coded for
the following variables - How frequently did the patient initiate
communication? - With which modality?
- How many of the nurse-patient communication
exchanges resulted in successful message
communication? - How many breakdowns occurred? How many were
successfully repaired? - How often did the nurse demonstrate behaviors
that facilitated communication? - What was the function of the message?
119Observer Ratings of Ease of Communication
120- Field Notes will also be compiled for qualitative
analysis of - Setting variables
- Topics
- Affect
- Unusual circumstances
- Presence of restraints
- Patients cognitive status
- Etc.
121Data Sample
- 4 observations/pt x 30 pts/phase
- 120 observations/phase
- x 3 phases
-
- 360 observations
122Covariates
- Will specific patient or nurse variables
explain/predict patterns in the data?
123- Patient Co-variates
- Gender
- Type of ICU
- Premorbid communication ability
- Measured by subscales of the NOMS
- Severity of Illness (APACHE)
- Length of Intubation prior to study enrollment
- Degree of Agitation (CAM-ICU)
- Degree of Sedation (RASS)
- Motor Ability (Lowenstein)
124- Nurse Co-variates
- Total nurse contact time with patient
- Time elapsed since training
- Critical care experience
125Interventions
AAC/SLP
BCST
Voiceless Patient
Communication Process
Nurse
Level of Consciousness Illness Severity Communicat
ion Fx Motor Fx
Nurse Contact Time Time Elapsed Since Training
Outcomes
Quality
Success
Ease
Frequency
126Data Analysis (S.S.)
- Exploratory data analysis
- Hierarchical generalized linear modeling (HGLM)
- Linear contrasts based on hypotheses
- Model assessment (i.e., residual analysis and
evaluation of outlier/ influential observations)
127Potential Problems Solutions
- Brief ICU stays/2 day data collection period
- Variable nurse scheduling/ day nurses only,
request same patient - Fluctuation in patient condition/ track delirium
and severity of illness as a covariate - Diffusion of the intervention/ assess in 2 ICUs,
use 3 separate cohorts - Measurement intrusiveness and complexity/ extra
effort - Is 2 days enough time to develop an effective
communication intervention?/ oh well -- it
represents the real life challenge!
128Our timeline
- January 2004 Final Instrument Development
Pilot Testing of Procedures - March 2004 Nurse/Patient enrollment for
Usual Care Condition - March 2005 Begin BCST Condition
-
- January 2006 Begin AAC-SLP Condition
- January 2007 Data Analysis
-
- July 2008 Complete Data Summarization
129Questions and Comments from the Audience
130Handouts
- Please cite information from this presentation as
follows - Correspondence
- Mary Beth Happ, Ph.D., R.N.
- University of Pittsburgh
- mhapp_at_pitt.edu
- Kathryn Garrett, Ph.D., CCC-SLP
- Duquesne University
- garrettk_at_duq.edu