Sandra L. Kane-Gill

Intensive care unit quality improvement: A "how-to" guide for the interdisciplinary team*

Objective:Quality improvement is an important activity for all members of the interdisciplinary critical care team. Although an increasing number of resources are available to guide clinicians, quality improvement activities can be overwhelming. Therefore, the Society of Critical Care Medicine charged this Outcomes Task Force with creating a “how-to” guide that focuses on critical care, summarizes key concepts, and outlines a practical approach to the development, implementation, evaluation, and maintenance of an interdisciplinary quality improvement program in the intensive care unit. Data Sources and Methods:The task force met in person twice and by conference call twice to write this document. We also conducted a literature search on “quality improvement” and “critical care or intensive care” and searched online for additional resources. Data Synthesis and Overview:We present an overview of quality improvement in the intensive care unit setting and then describe the following steps for initiating or improving an interdisciplinary critical care quality improvement program: a) identify local motivation, support teamwork, and develop strong leadership; b) prioritize potential projects and choose the first target; c) operationalize the measures, build support for the project, and develop a business plan; d) perform an environmental scan to better understand the problem, potential barriers, opportunities, and resources for the project; e) create a data collection system that accurately measures baseline performance and future improvements; f) create a data reporting system that allows clinicians and others to understand the problem; g) introduce effective strategies to change clinician behavior. In addition, we identify four steps for evaluating and maintaining this program: a) determine whether the target is changing with periodic data collection; b) modify behavior change strategies to improve or sustain improvements; c) focus on interdisciplinary collaboration; and d) develop and sustain support from the hospital leadership. We also identify a number of online resources to complement this overview. Conclusions:This Society of Critical Care Medicine Task Force report provides an overview for clinicians interested in developing or improving a quality improvement program using a step-wise approach. Success depends not only on committed interdisciplinary work that is incremental and continuous but also on strong leadership. Further research is needed to refine the methods and identify the most cost-effective means of improving the quality of health care received by critically ill patients and their families.

Costs and outcomes of acute kidney injury (AKI) following cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a recognized complication of cardiac surgery; however, the variability in costs and outcomes reported are due, in part, to different criteria for diagnosing and classifying AKI. We determined costs, resource use and mortality rate of patients. We used the serum creatinine component of the RIFLE system to classify AKI. METHODS A retrospective cohort study was conducted from the electronic data repository at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center of patients who underwent cardiac surgery and had an elevation (>or=0.5 mg/dl) of serum creatinine postoperatively. Data were compared to age- and APACHE III-matched controls. Cost, mortality and resource use of AKI patients were determined postoperatively for each of the three RIFLE classes on the basis of changes in serum creatinine. RESULTS Of the 3741 admissions, 258 (6.9%) had AKI and were classified as RIFLE-R 138 (3.7%), RIFLE-I 70 (1.9%) and RIFLE-F 50 (1.3%). Total and departmental level costs, length of stay (LOS) and requirement for renal replacement therapy (RRT) were higher in AKI patients compared to controls. Statistically significant differences in all costs, mortality rate and requirement for RRT were seen in the patients stratified into RIFLE-R, RIFLE-I and RIFLE-F. Even patients with the smallest change in serum creatinine, namely RIFLE-R, had a 2.2-fold greater mortality, a 1.6-fold increase in ICU LOS and 1.6-fold increase in total postoperative costs compared to controls. DISCUSSION Costs, LOS and mortality are higher in postoperative cardiac surgery patients who develop AKI using RIFLE criteria, and these values increase as AKI severity worsens.

Intensive Insulin Therapy for Critically III Patients

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of glycemic control of intensive insulin therapy and recommend its place in the management of critically ill patients. DATA SOURCES: Searches of MEDLINE (1966—March 2004) and Cochrane Library, as well as an extensive manual review of abstracts were performed using the key search terms hyperglycemia, insulin, intensive care unit, critically ill, outcomes, and guidelines and algorithms. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All articles identified from the data sources were evaluated and deemed relevant if they included and assessed clinical outcomes. DATA SYNTHESIS: Mortality among patients with prolonged critical illness exceeds 20%, and most deaths are attributable to sepsis and multisystem organ failure. Hyperglycemia is common in critically ill patients, even in those with no history of diabetes mellitus. Maintaining normoglycemia with insulin in critically ill patients has been shown to improve neurologic, cardiovascular, and infectious outcomes. Most importantly, morbidity and mortality are reduced with aggressive insulin therapy. This information can be implemented into protocols to maintain strict control of glucose. CONCLUSIONS: Use of insulin protocols in critically ill patients improves blood glucose control and reduces morbidity and mortality in critically ill populations. Glucose levels in critically ill patients should be controlled through implementation of insulin protocols with the goal to achieve normoglycemia, regardless of a history of diabetes. Frequent monitoring is imperative to avoid hypoglycemia.

Role of the Bispectral Index in Sedation Monitoring in the ICU

Objective: To review and critique evidence for the use of the bispectral index (BIS) in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Data Sources: A computer search of English-language articles in MEDLINE (1966–July 2005), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1971–July 2005), and Scientific Citation Index Expanded (1980–July 2005) was conducted. A manual search of abstracts was also performed using the key search terms BIS, sedation, and critical care. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Case series, letters, editorials, and clinical studies that evaluated BIS in ICU patients were considered for inclusion. Data Synthesis: Nineteen studies comparing the BIS with sedation scales were evaluated, revealing that the BIS trends lower with increasing sedation. The BIS appeared to correlate better when sedation scores were grouped rather than individual values. However, correlations between BIS and subjective scales were low in most studies (r2 0.21–0.93). Additionally, there was poor correlation between drug dosage and the BIS. Randomized, controlled trials demonstrating improved outcomes with BIS monitoring have not been reported. Conclusions: Interpreting literature on the usefulness of the BIS in the ICU is difficult for reasons that include heterogeneous populations, different methods of collecting BIS data, and use of different versions of BIS software and hardware. Outcomes data are lacking. The 2002 Society of Critical Care Medicine Sedation Guidelines recommendation that more data are needed before the BIS should be used routinely in the ICU remains unchanged. We recommend that further studies be conducted to determine the optimal method of obtaining BIS data and evaluate the impact of the BIS on relevant patient outcomes.

A cost-minimization analysis of dexmedetomidine compared with midazolam for long-term sedation in the intensive care unit*

Objective: To compare the intensive care unit costs and determine factors influencing these costs in mechanically ventilated patients randomized to dexmedetomidine or midazolam by continuous infusion. Design: Cost minimization analysis of a double-blind, multicenter clinical trial randomizing patients 2:1 to receive dexmedetomidine or midazolam from the institutional perspective. Setting: Sixty-eight intensive care units in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, Brazil, and Argentina. Patients: A total of 366 intubated intensive care unit patients anticipated to require sedation for >24 hrs. Measurements and Main Results: Intensive care unit resource use was compared within the two treatment arms, using the U.S. representative costs for these resources. The analyses characterized patient costs from start of study drug until intensive care unit discharge including costs associated with the intensive care unit stay, costs during mechanical ventilation, study drug acquisition cost, and costs of treating adverse drug reactions probably or possibly related to study drugs. Blinded to treatment group, costs were calculated using Medicare reimbursement schedules, average IMS drug costs, expert opinion, and peer-reviewed literature. Censored lengths of intensive care unit stay and mechanical ventilation were imputed, using a nonparametric adjustment algorithm. Crude and multivariate median regressions were performed to relate intensive care unit cost and treatment. Including drug acquisition cost, sedation with dexmedetomidine was associated with a median total intensive care unit cost savings of

Acute kidney disease and renal recovery: consensus report of the Acute Disease Quality Initiative (ADQI) 16 Workgroup

9679 (confidence interval,

Adverse drug events in intensive care units: risk factors, impact, and the role of team care.

2314–

A critical evaluation of clinical decision support for the detection of drug–drug interactions

17,045) compared with midazolam. The primary cost drivers were reduced costs of intensive care unit stay (median savings,

Analysis of risk factors for adverse drug events in critically ill patients

6584, 95% confidence interval,

Analgosedation: A Paradigm Shift in Intensive Care Unit Sedation Practice

727–