MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416039496 · doi:10.1016/j.iccn.2025.104266

Implementation and sustainability of an innovative ICU e-diary

2025· article· en· W4416039496 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Louise Rose, Amy Welch, Kemi Okelana, Chloe Apps, Kate Brooks, Erin Law, Andrew Slack, Katie Susser, Joel Meyer

Bibliographic record

VenueIntensive and Critical Care Nursing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicHealthcare Systems and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGuy's and St Thomas' Charity
KeywordsSustainabilityMEDLINECoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To characterise e-diary implementation exploring ICU staff uptake, family member engagement, perceived barriers/facilitators and perceived acceptability/feasibility and sustained use over time. METHODS: Service innovation and evaluation study of an e-diary (aTouchAway™, Aetonix, Canada) for patients with ≥ 2 days anticipated ICU stay. We implemented (Jan2022-Aug2022) in four ICUs (52 beds) across two UK hospitals. We conducted a one-day pre-implementation paper-diary snapshot audit. Implementation strategies included a dedicated implementation officer, repeated education, dedicated resources, completion reminders, live demonstrations, and e-diary completion prizes. We collected data on commencement rates, barriers/facilitators, and feasibility/acceptability using Acceptability and Feasibility of Intervention Measure (AIM/FIM) questionnaires. To assess sustained use, we completed three one-day audits (June2023), with subsequent monthly audits (Dec2023-Dec2024). RESULTS: Pre-implementation, 7/35 (20%) patients had a paper diary. During the implementation phase the monthly mean (SD) e-diary commencement rate was 65% (23%) with 380 patients having 1242 diary entries (nurses 807; therapists (physio/occupational/speech) 146; family members 289). We received 35/110 staff questionnaires (response rate 32%). Most perceived the e-diary easy to access (74%) and use (63%). Similar proportions perceived it less (20%) or more (26%) time consuming than paper diaries. Facilitators included reduced environmental impact, negligible loss, family participation, guaranteed legibility, data security, and easy accessibility. Barriers comprised need for login and education; difficulty for less technologically-competent families; and inability to personalise with pictures. Mean (SD) AIM and FIM scores were 16.6 (1.67) and 16.0 (1.9). In the sustainability phase, our snapshot audit (June2023) found a commencement rate of 63%, with a mean (SD) monthly commencement rate of 45.6% (16.7%). CONCLUSIONS: We developed a bespoke e-diary with moderate yet sustained implementation success. We identified facilitators to be harnessed by other centres considering e-diary implementation. Although some barriers are non-modifiable, strategies can support family members to engage. IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: For centres considering e-diary adoption, they appear an acceptable alternative with facilitators that can be harnessed to promote adoption but barriers that need consideration.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.655
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.358 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntensive and Critical Care NursingSame topicHealthcare Systems and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207