Katie N. Dainty

A multifaceted intervention for quality improvement in a network of intensive care units: a cluster randomized trial.

CONTEXT Evidence-based practices improve intensive care unit (ICU) outcomes, but eligible patients may not receive them. Community hospitals treat most critically ill patients but may have few resources dedicated to quality improvement. OBJECTIVE To determine the effectiveness of a multicenter quality improvement program to increase delivery of 6 evidence-based ICU practices. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Pragmatic cluster-randomized trial among 15 community hospital ICUs in Ontario, Canada. A total of 9269 admissions occurred during the trial (November 2005 to October 2006) and 7141 admissions during a decay-monitoring period (December 2006 to August 2007). INTERVENTION We implemented a videoconference-based forum including audit and feedback, expert-led educational sessions, and dissemination of algorithms to sequentially improve delivery of 6 practices. We randomized ICUs into 2 groups. Each group received this intervention, targeting a new practice every 4 months, while acting as control for the other group, in which a different practice was targeted in the same period. MAIN MEASURE OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was the summary ratio of odds ratios (ORs) for improvement in adoption (determined by daily data collection) of all 6 practices during the trial in intervention vs control ICUs. RESULTS Overall, adoption of the targeted practices was greater in intervention ICUs than in controls (summary ratio of ORs, 2.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-7.74). Improved delivery in intervention ICUs was greatest for semirecumbent positioning to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia (90.0% of patient-days in last month vs 50.0% in first month; OR, 6.35; 95% CI, 1.85-21.79) and precautions to prevent catheter-related bloodstream infection (70.0% of patients receiving central lines vs 10.6%; OR, 30.06; 95% CI, 11.00-82.17). Adoption of other practices, many with high baseline adherence, changed little. CONCLUSION In a collaborative network of community ICUs, a multifaceted quality improvement intervention improved adoption of care practices. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00332982.

Knee-specific quality-of-life instruments: which ones measure symptoms and disabilities most important to patients?

Background Knee-specific quality-of-life instruments are commonly used outcome measures. However, they have not been compared for their ability to detect symptoms and disabilities important to patients. Study Design Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 1. Methods Subjective portions of 11 knee-specific instruments were consolidated. The frequency and importance of each item were assessed. One hundred fifty-three patients with anterior cruciate ligament ruptures, isolated meniscal tears, or osteoarthritis were polled. Instruments were ranked according to the number of items with high mean importance, high frequency importance product, and low mean importance, and according to the number endorsed by at least 51% of patients. Results For anterior cruciate ligament tears, the Mohtadi quality-of-life instrument scored highest in 3 categories. For meniscal tears, the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool scored highly in all 4 categories. For osteoarthritis, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index scored highly in 4 categories. Of the general knee instruments, the International Knee Documentation Committee Standard Evaluation Form and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score scored favorably. Conclusion The Mohtadi quality-of-life instrument, Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index—disease-specific instruments—contain many items important to patients. Of general knee instruments studied, the International Knee Documentation Committee Standard Evaluation Form and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score contain the most items important to patients. Clinical Relevance This study guides clinicians and researchers in selecting instruments that ensure that the patients perspective is considered for outcome studies involving 3 common knee disorders.

Part 4: Advanced life support

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) Advanced Life Support (ALS) Task Force performed detailed systematic reviews based on the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies1 and using the methodological approach proposed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group.2 Questions to be addressed (using the PICO [population, intervention, comparator, outcome] format)3 were prioritized by ALS Task Force members (by voting). Prioritization criteria included awareness of significant new data and new controversies or questions about practice. Questions about topics no longer relevant to contemporary practice or where little new research has occurred were given lower priority. The ALS Task Force prioritized 42 PICO questions for review. With the assistance of information specialists, a detailed search for relevant articles was performed in each of 3 online databases (PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library). By using detailed inclusion and exclusion criteria, articles were screened for further evaluation. The reviewers for each question created a reconciled risk of bias assessment for each of the included studies, using state-of-the-art tools: Cochrane for randomized controlled trials (RCTs),4 Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 for studies of diagnostic accuracy,5 and GRADE for observational studies that inform both therapy and prognosis questions.6 GRADE evidence profile tables7 were then created to facilitate an evaluation of the evidence in support of each of the critical and important outcomes. The quality of the evidence (or confidence in the estimate of the effect) was categorized as high, moderate, low, or very low,8 based on the study methodologies and the 5 core GRADE domains of risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision, and other considerations (including publication bias).9 These evidence profile tables were then used to create a …

Cardiac Arrest in Pregnancy: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

This is the first scientific statement from the American Heart Association on maternal resuscitation. This document will provide readers with up-to-date and comprehensive information, guidelines, and recommendations for all aspects of maternal resuscitation. Maternal resuscitation is an acute event that involves many subspecialties and allied health providers; this document will be relevant to all healthcare providers who are involved in resuscitation and specifically maternal resuscitation.

Perceived barriers to therapeutic hypothermia for patients resuscitated from cardiac arrest: a qualitative study of emergency department and critical care workers.

Objective: To identify the barriers to implementation of mild therapeutic hypothermia for adult survivors of cardiac arrest. Despite scientific evidence to support therapeutic hypothermia for resuscitated cardiac arrest patients, it is inconsistently and at times inadequately used. Design: Qualitative study, using semistructured interviews. Setting: A stratified random sample of 14 sites from an established network of 43 hospitals, including both community and tertiary care centers in Southern Ontario, Canada. Participants: Twenty-one intensive care unit and emergency department physicians and nurses. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Purposive sampling was used to interview individuals who were most likely to be involved in the implementation and evaluation of the hypothermia protocol. All interviews were conducted by telephone by a clinician and a qualitative researcher. Interviews were recorded electronically and transcribed unless the participant declined to have the interview recorded. Untranscribed interviews were recorded as field notes and as direct quotations. New interviews were conducted until thematic saturation occurred. The analysis was completed through three phases of coding. Respondents identified lack of familiarity and availability of concrete therapeutic hypothermia protocols and process issues as the most frequent barriers. Process concerns included availability of equipment, equipment costs, and high workload demands for emergency nurses. Other barriers identified were variable nursing awareness, variable staff uptake, lack of agreement with supporting evidence, lack of interdisciplinary collaboration between the intensive care unit and emergency department, lack of interprofessional education between nurses and physicians, and challenges inherent in applying an intervention infrequently. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that the systematic adoption of a new intervention, therapeutic hypothermia, is met with interdependent generic, local, and individual barriers. A working awareness of the types of barriers that exist at multiple sites will assist in targeting specific knowledge translation strategies to improve adherence to evidence-based practice.

Predictors of adopting therapeutic hypothermia for post-cardiac arrest patients among Canadian emergency and critical care physicians

Therapeutic hypothermia improves outcomes in resuscitated cardiac arrest patients, but prior application rates are less than 30%. We sought to evaluate self-reported physician adoption, predictors of adoption, and barriers to use among Canadian emergency and critical care physicians. A web-based modified Dillman questionnaire asked all physicians on the membership lists of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians and the Canadian Critical Care Forum physicians to report their experience with therapeutic hypothermia using the Pathman framework of changing physician behaviour. We used logistic regression to explore the association between physician and practice variables and the adoption of therapeutic hypothermia. We surveyed 1264 physicians; 39% responded. Most (78%) were emergency physicians, 54% worked at tertiary care hospitals, 62% treated >10 arrests annually and 50% had standardized cooling protocols. Most respondents were aware of therapeutic hypothermia (99%) and agreed that it is beneficial (91%), but only two-thirds (68%) had used it in clinical practice. Predictors for adopting therapeutic hypothermia included critical care field of practice (OR 6.3, 95% CI 2.5-16.0), availability of a cooling protocol (OR 5.6, CI 3.1-10.0), being <10 years post-residency (OR 2.0, CI 1.2-3.3), and treating >10 cardiac arrests annually (OR 2.6, CI 1.6-4.1). Common barriers included: lack of awareness of recommended practice (31%), perceptions of poor prognosis (25%), too much work required to cool (20%) and staffing shortages (20%). Therapeutic hypothermia after cardiac arrest has not been universally adopted. Adoption might be improved through protocol implementation, education about benefits and prognosis, and strategies to make administration easier.

The intensive care unit work environment: Current challenges and recommendations for the future

Abstract The need for critical care services has grown substantially in the last decade in most of the G8 nations. This increasing demand has accentuated an already existing shortage of trained critical care professionals. Recent studies argue that difficulty in recruiting an appropriate workforce relates to a shortage of graduating professionals and unhealthy work environments in which critical care professionals must work. Objective This narrative review summarizes existing literature and experiences about the key work environment challenges reported within the critical care context and suggests best practices—implemented in hospitals or suggested by professional associations—which can be an initial step in enhancing patient care and professional recruitment and retention in our intensive care units, with particular emphasis on the recruitment and retention of an appropriately trained and satisfied workforce. The experiences are categorized for the physical, emotional, and professional environments. A case study is appended to enhance understanding of the magnitude and some of the proposed remedies of these experiences.

External Rotation Immobilization for Primary Shoulder Dislocation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BackgroundThe traditional treatment for primary anterior shoulder dislocations has been immobilization in a sling with the arm in a position of adduction and internal rotation. However, recent basic science and clinical data have suggested recurrent instability may be reduced with immobilization in external rotation after primary shoulder dislocation.Questions/purposesWe performed a randomized controlled trial to compare the (1) frequency of recurrent instability and (2) disease-specific quality-of-life scores after treatment of first-time shoulder dislocation using either immobilization in external rotation or immobilization in internal rotation in a group of young patients.MethodsSixty patients younger than 35 years of age with primary, traumatic, anterior shoulder dislocations were randomized (concealed, computer-generated) to immobilization with either an internal rotation sling (n = 29) or an external rotation brace (n = 31) at a mean of 4 days after closed reduction (range, 1–7 days). Patients with large bony lesions or polytrauma were excluded. The two groups were similar at baseline. Both groups were immobilized for 4 weeks with identical therapy protocols thereafter. Blinded assessments were completed by independent observers for a minimum of 12 months (mean, 25 months; range, 12–43 months). Recurrent instability was defined as a second documented anterior dislocation or multiple episodes of shoulder subluxation severe enough for the patient to request surgical stabilization. Validated disease-specific quality-of-life data (Western Ontario Shoulder Instability index [WOSI], American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons evaluation [ASES]) were also collected. Ten patients (17%, five from each group) were lost to followup. Reported compliance with immobilization in both groups was excellent (80%).ResultsWith the numbers available, there was no difference in the rate of recurrent instability between groups: 10 of 27 patients (37%) with the external rotation brace versus 10 of 25 patients (40%) with the sling redislocated or developed symptomatic recurrent instability (p = 0.41). WOSI scores were not different between groups (p = 0.74) and, although the difference in ASES scores approached statistical significance (p = 0.05), the magnitude of this difference was small and of uncertain clinical importance.ConclusionsDespite previous published findings, our results show immobilization in external rotation did not confer a significant benefit versus sling immobilization in the prevention of recurrent instability after primary anterior shoulder dislocation. Further studies with larger numbers may elucidate whether functional outcomes, compliance, or comfort with immobilization can be improved with this device.Level of EvidenceLevel I, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

A knowledge translation collaborative to improve the use of therapeutic hypothermia in post-cardiac arrest patients: protocol for a stepped wedge randomized trial

BackgroundAdvances in resuscitation science have dramatically improved survival rates following cardiac arrest. However, about 60% of adults that regain spontaneous circulation die before leaving the hospital. Recently it has been shown that inducing hypothermia in cardiac arrest survivors immediately following their arrival in hospital can dramatically improve both overall survival and neurological outcomes. Despite the strong evidence for its efficacy and the apparent simplicity of this intervention, recent surveys show that therapeutic hypothermia is delivered inconsistently, incompletely, and often with delay.Methods and designThis study will evaluate a multi-faceted knowledge translation strategy designed to increase the utilization rate of induced hypothermia in survivors of cardiac arrest across a network of 37 hospitals in Southwestern Ontario, Canada. The study is designed as a stepped wedge randomized trial lasting two years. Individual hospitals will be randomly assigned to four different wedges that will receive the active knowledge translation strategy according to a sequential rollout over a number of time periods. By the end of the study, all hospitals will have received the intervention. The primary aim is to measure the effectiveness of a multifaceted knowledge translation plan involving education, reminders, and audit-feedback for improving the use of induced hypothermia in survivors of cardiac arrest presenting to the emergency department. The primary outcome is the proportion of eligible OHCA patients that are cooled to a body temperature of 32 to 34°C within six hours of arrival in the hospital. Secondary outcomes will include process of care measures and clinical outcomes.DiscussionInducing hypothermia in cardiac arrest survivors immediately following their arrival to hospital has been shown to dramatically improve both overall survival and neurological outcomes. However, this lifesaving treatment is frequently not applied in practice. If this trial is positive, our results will have broad implications by showing that a knowledge translation strategy shared across a collaborative network of hospitals can increase the number of patients that receive this lifesaving intervention in a timely manner.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Trial Identifier: NCT00683683

Interprofessional communication with hospitalist and consultant physicians in general internal medicine: a qualitative study.

BackgroundStudies in General Internal Medicine [GIM] settings have shown that optimizing interprofessional communication is important, yet complex and challenging. While the physician is integral to interprofessional work in GIM there are often communication barriers in place that impact perceptions and experiences with the quality and quantity of their communication with other team members. This study aims to understand how team members’ perceptions and experiences with the communication styles and strategies of either hospitalist or consultant physicians in their units influence the quality and effectiveness of interprofessional relations and work.MethodsA multiple case study methodology was used. Thirty-one semi-structured interviews were conducted with physicians, nurses and other health care providers [e.g. physiotherapist, social worker, etc.] working across 5 interprofessional GIM programs. Questions explored participants’ experiences with communication with all other health care providers in their units, probing for barriers and enablers to effective interprofessional work, as well as the use of communication tools or strategies. Observations in GIM wards were also conducted.ResultsThree main themes emerged from the data: [1] availability for interprofessional communication, [2] relationship-building for effective communication, and [3] physician vs. team-based approaches. Findings suggest a significant contrast in participants’ experiences with the quantity and quality of interprofessional relationships and work when comparing the communication styles and strategies of hospitalist and consultant physicians. Hospitalist staffed GIM units were believed to have more frequent and higher caliber interprofessional communication and collaboration, resulting in more positive experiences among all health care providers in a given unit.ConclusionsThis study helps to improve our understanding of the collaborative environment in GIM, comparing the communication styles and strategies of hospitalist and consultant physicians, as well as the experiences of providers working with them. The implications of this research are globally important for understanding how to create opportunities for physicians and their colleagues to meaningfully and consistently participate in interprofessional communication which has been shown to improve patient, provider, and organizational outcomes.