Beneficial "halo effects" of surgical resident performance feedback

The Spillover Effects of Quality Improvement Beyond Target Populations in Mechanical Ventilation

To assess the impact of a mechanical ventilation quality improvement program on patients who were excluded from the intervention.

DESIGN

Before-during-and-after implementation interrupted time series analysis to assess the effect of the intervention between coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery patients (included) and left-sided valve surgery patients (excluded).

SETTING

Academic medical center.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing CABG and left-sided valve procedures were analyzed.

INTERVENTIONS

A postoperative mechanical ventilation quality improvement program was developed for patients undergoing CABG.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Patients undergoing CABG had a median mechanical ventilation time of 11 hours during P0 ("before" phase) and 6.22 hours during P2 ("after" phase; p < 0.001). A spillover effect was observed because mechanical ventilation times also decreased from 10 hours during P0 to 6 hours during P2 among valve patients who were excluded from the protocol (p < 0.001). The interrupted time series analysis demonstrated a significant level of change for ventilation time from P0 to P2 for both CABG (p < 0.0001) and valve patients (p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the slope of change between the CABG and valve patient populations across time cohorts (P0 vs P1 [p = 0.8809]; P1 vs P2 [p = 0.3834]; P0 vs P2 [p = 0.7672]), which suggests that the rate of change in mechanical ventilation times was similar between included and excluded patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Decreased mechanical ventilation times for patients who were not included in a protocol suggests a spillover effect of quality improvement and demonstrates that quality improvement can have benefits beyond a target population.

Alert-Triggered Patient Education Versus Nurse Feedback for Nonadministered Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Doses: A Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial

Background Many hospitalized patients are not administered prescribed doses of pharmacologic venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. Methods and Results In this cluster-randomized controlled trial, all adult non-intensive care units (10 medical, 6 surgical) in 1 academic hospital were randomized to either a real-time, electronic alert-triggered, patient-centered education bundle intervention or nurse feedback intervention to evaluate their effectiveness for reducing nonadministration of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. Primary outcome was the proportion of nonadministered doses of prescribed pharmacologic prophylaxis. Secondary outcomes were proportions of nonadministered doses stratified by nonadministration reasons (patient refusal, other). To test our primary hypothesis that both interventions would reduce nonadministration, we compared outcomes pre- versus postintervention within each cohort. Secondary hypotheses were tested comparing the effectiveness between cohorts. Of 11 098 patient visits, overall dose nonadministration declined significantly after the interventions (13.4% versus 9.2%; odds ratio [OR], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.57-0.71]). Nonadministration decreased significantly (P<0.001) in both arms: patient-centered education bundle, 12.2% versus 7.4% (OR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.48-0.66]), and nurse feedback, 14.7% versus 11.2% (OR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.62-0.84]). Patient refusal decreased significantly in both arms: patient-centered education bundle, 7.3% versus 3.7% (OR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.37-0.58]), and nurse feedback, 9.5% versus 7.1% (OR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.59-0.86]). No differential effect occurred on medical versus surgical units. The patient-centered education bundle was significantly more effective in reducing all nonadministered (P=0.03) and refused doses (P=0.003) compared with nurse feedback (OR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.0-1.61]; P=0.03 for interaction). Conclusions Information technology strategies like the alert-triggered, targeted patient-centered education bundle, and nurse-focused audit and feedback can improve venous thromboembolism prophylaxis administration. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03367364.

Audit and Feedback to Surgery Interns and Residents on Prescribing Risk-Appropriate Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of feedback using an emailed scorecard and a web-based dashboard on risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis prescribing practices among general surgery interns and residents.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

The Johns Hopkins Hospital, an urban academic medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

All 45 trainees (19 post-graduate year [PGY] 1 interns and 26 PGY-2 to PGY-5 residents) in our general surgery program.

INTERVENTION

Feedback implementation encompassed three sequential periods: (1) scorecard (July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015); (2) no feedback/wash-in (July 1 through October 31, 2015); and (3) web-based dashboard (November 1, 2015 through June 30, 2016). No feedback served as the baseline period for the intern cohort. The scorecard was a static document showing an individual's compliance with risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis prescription compared to compliance of their de-identified peers. The web-based dashboard included other information (e.g., patient details for suboptimal prophylaxis orders) besides individual compliance compared to their de-identified peers. Trainees could access the dashboard anytime to view current and historic performance. We sent monthly emails to all trainees for both feedback mechanisms. Main outcome was proportion of patients prescribed risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis, and mean percentages reported.

RESULTS

During this study, 4088 VTE prophylaxis orders were placed. Among residents, mean prescription of risk-appropriate prophylaxis was higher in the wash-in (98.4% vs 95.6%, p < 0.001) and dashboard (98.4 vs 95.6%, p < 0.001) periods compared to the scorecard period. There was no difference in mean compliance between the wash-in and dashboard periods (98.4% vs 98.4%, p = 0.99). Among interns, mean prescription of risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis improved between the wash-in and dashboard periods (91.5% vs 96.4%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Using audit and individualized performance feedback to general surgery trainees through a web-based dashboard improved prescribing of appropriate VTE prophylaxis to a near-perfect performance.

Association of Emergency Department Waiting Times With Patient Experience in Admitted and Discharged Patients

Prolonged waiting times are associated with worse patient experience in patients discharged from the emergency department (ED). However, it is unclear which component of the waiting times is most impactful to the patient experience and the impact on hospitalized patients. We performed a retrospective analysis of ED patients between July 2018 and March 30, 2020. In all, 3278 patients were included: 1477 patients were discharged from the ED, and 1680 were admitted. Discharged patients had a longer door-to-first provider and door-to-doctor time, but a shorter doctor-to-disposition, disposition-to-departure, and total ED time when compared to admitted patients. Some, but not all, components of waiting times were significantly higher in patients with suboptimal experience (<100th percentile). Prolonged door-to-doctor time was significantly associated with worse patient experience in discharged patients and in patients with hospital length of stay ≤4 days. Prolonged ED waiting times were significantly associated with worse patient experience in patients who were discharged from the ED and in inpatients with short length of stay. Door-to-doctor time seems to have the highest impact on the patient’s experience of these 2 groups.

Disseminating a patient-centered education bundle to reduce missed doses of pharmacologic venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis to a community hospital

Background

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of preventable harm in hospitalized patients. However, many doses of prescribed pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis are frequently missed. We investigated the effect of a patient-centered education bundle on missed doses of VTE prophylaxis in a community hospital.

Methods

We performed a pre-post analysis examining missed doses of VTE prophylaxis in a community hospital. A real-time alert from the electronic health record system facilitated the delivery of a patient education bundle intervention. We included all patient visits on a single floor where at least 1 dose of VTE prophylaxis was prescribed during pre- (January 1, 2018, - November 31, 2018) and post- (January 1 - June 31, 2019) intervention periods. Outcomes included any missed dose (primary) and reasons for missed doses (refusal, other [secondary]) and were compared between both periods.

Results

1,614 patient visits were included. The proportion of any missed dose significantly decreased (13.8% vs. 8.2% [OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.48, 0.64]) between the pre-post intervention periods. Patient refusal was the most frequent reason for missed doses. In the post-intervention period, patient refusal significantly decreased from 8.8% to 5.0% (OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.46, 0.64). Similarly, other reasons for missed doses significantly decreased from 5.0% to 3.2% (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.51, 0.77).

Conclusions

A real-time alert-triggered patient-centered education bundle developed and tested in an academic hospital, significantly reduced missed doses of prescribed pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis when disseminated to a community hospital.

Effectiveness of ambulation to prevent venous thromboembolism in patients admitted to hospital: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patient ambulation is frequently recommended to help prevent venous thromboembolism during hospital admission. Our objective was to synthesize the evidence for ambulation as a prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in hospital.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials indexed from their inception through April 2020 for studies of adult patients admitted to hospital, in which ambulation or mobilization alone or concomitant with prophylaxis was indicated for prevention of venous thromboembolism. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov for unpublished trials. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Two reviewers independently screened articles and assessed risk of bias using 2 validated tools. We scored studies on quality of reporting, internal and external validity and study power; combined scores determined the overall quality.

RESULTS

Eighteen articles met the inclusion criteria: 8 retrospective and 2 prospective cohorts, 7 RCTs and 1 secondary analysis of an RCT. The intervention (ambulation or mobilized) groups varied across studies. Five studies examined exercise as a therapeutic prophylaxis for thrombosis and 9 described an ambulation protocol. Five studies attempted to quantify amount and duration of patient ambulation and 3 reported ambulation distance. In the 5 studies rated as good or excellent statistical quality, findings were mixed. Incidence of venous thromboembolism was lowest when pharmacologic anticoagulants were added as part of the prescribed prophylaxis regimen.

INTERPRETATION

We did not find high-quality evidence supporting ambulation alone as an effective prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism. Ambulation should not be considered an adequate prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism, nor as an adequate reason to discontinue pharmacologic prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism during a patient's hospital admission.

Using electronic health record system triggers to target delivery of a patient-centered intervention to improve venous thromboembolism prevention for hospitalized patients: Is there a differential effect by race?

Background

Racial disparities are common in healthcare. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of preventable harm, and disparities observed in prevention practices. We examined the impact of a patient-centered VTE education bundle on the non-administration of preventive prophylaxis by race.

Methods

A post-hoc, subset analysis (stratified by race) of a larger nonrandomized trial. Pre-post comparisons analysis were conducted on 16 inpatient units; study periods were October 2014 through March 2015 (baseline) and April through December 2015 (post-intervention). Patients on 4 intervention units received the patient-centered, nurse educator-led intervention if the electronic health record alerted a non-administered dose of VTE prophylaxis. Patients on 12 control units received no intervention. We compared the conditional odds of non-administered doses of VTE prophylaxis when patient refusal was a reason for non-administration, stratified by race.

Results

Of 272 patient interventions, 123 (45.2%) were white, 126 (46.3%) were black, and 23 (8.5%) were other races. A significant reduction was observed in the odds of non-administration of prophylaxis on intervention units compared to control units among patients who were black (OR 0.61; 95% CI, 0.46–0.81, p<0.001), white (OR 0.57; 95% CI, 0.44–0.75, p<0.001), and other races (OR 0.50; 95% CI, 0.29–0.88, p = 0.015).

Conclusion

Our finding suggests that the patient education materials, developed collaboratively with a diverse group of patients, improved patient’s understanding and the importance of VTE prevention through prophylaxis. Quality improvement interventions should examine any differential effects by patient characteristics to ensure disparities are addressed and all patients experience the same benefits.

Defects in Processes of Care for Pharmacologic Prophylaxis Are Common Among Neurosurgery Patients Who Develop In-Hospital Postoperative Venous Thromboembolism

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a cause of considerable morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. An evidence-based algorithm was developed and implemented at our institution to guide perioperative VTE prophylaxis management.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated compliance with prescription of risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis and administration of prescribed VTE prophylaxis in neurosurgery patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of postoperative neurosurgery patients at a single institution with subsequent diagnosis of acute VTE during their inpatient stay. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis and prescribing patterns.

RESULTS

The incidence of VTE in our neurosurgery population was 248/13,913 (1.8%). Of the 123 patients, the median time to VTE diagnosis was 96 hours after surgery (interquartile range [IQR], 58-188 hours). A total of 108 patients (87.8%) were prescribed risk-appropriate VTE prophylaxis, among whom 61 (56.5%) received all doses as prescribed. Fifty-three patients (43.1%) missed ≥1 dose of prescribed prophylaxis and the median missed doses was 3 (IQR, 0-3). The median time to first dose of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis was 42 hours (IQR, 28-51). More than half (n = 63, 51.2%) of the VTE risk assessments contained ≥1 error, of which 15 (23.8%) would have resulted in a change in recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our evidence-based VTE prophylaxis algorithm was not accurately completed in more than half of patients. Many patients who developed VTE had a defect in their VTE prophylaxis management during their inpatient stay. Research to improve optimal VTE prevention practice in neurosurgery patients is needed.

Residents as Key Effectors of Change in Improving Opioid Prescribing Behavior

OBJECTIVE

There is a national imperative to curb the flow of opioids into our communities. In academic medical centers, the majority of discharge opioid prescriptions are written by residents who receive predominantly ad hoc, peer-to-peer education on perioperative analgesia. We aimed to reduce opioid overprescribing after common general surgical operations through a resident led quality improvement project that involved formal educational interventions and feedback on prescribing habits.

DESIGN

A transdisciplinary team was formed to identify how current prescribing habits differed from best practices, and to identify the educational needs to bridge this gap. We then focused on multiple educational interventions, including department-wide grand rounds, case-based conferences with residents, and dedicated didactic sessions on opioid prescribing. Feedback reports of opioid prescribing habits of the residents were developed. Residents' attitudes toward opioid prescribing were assessed using an anonymous survey before and after our interventions. Actual opioid prescribing data were abstracted from the electronic health record.

SETTING

A single academic medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

A surgical resident led a transdisciplinary team consisting of faculty, anesthesiologists, pharmacists, advanced practice providers, and health informaticians within the Department of Surgery.

RESULTS

After our educational intervention, residents' impression of the appropriate number of opioid pills necessary after common general surgical operations decreased significantly, as measured by surveys pre- and postintervention. Electronic health record data regarding actual opioid prescribing behavior show significant discrepancy from the survey responses, but does show a significant decrease in the quantity of opioids prescribed for most evaluated operations following the educational intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid prescribing is an ideal target for resident led education and quality improvement. Residents' attitudes toward appropriate opioid prescribing tend to differ from actual prescribing habits. Our results demonstrate that a well-scoped, resident-driven quality improvement program can lead to change in both attitudes and practice surrounding opioid prescribing.

Nonadministration of medication doses for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in a cohort of hospitalized patients

PURPOSE

Results of a study to characterize patterns of nonadministration of medication doses for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention among hospitalized patients are presented.

METHODS

The electronic records of all patients admitted to 4 floors of a medical center during a 1-month period were examined to identify patients whose records indicated at least 1 nonadministered dose of medication for VTE prophylaxis. Proportions of nonadministered doses by medication type, intended route of administration, and VTE risk categorization were compared; reasons for nonadministration were evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, 12.7% of all medication doses prescribed to patients in the study cohort (n = 75) during the study period (857 of 6,758 doses in total) were not administered. Nonadministration of 1 or more doses of VTE prophylaxis medication was nearly twice as likely for subcutaneous anticoagulants than for all other medication types (231 of 1,112 doses [20.8%] versus 626 of 5,646 doses [11.2%], p < 0.001). For all medications prescribed, the most common reason for nonadministration was patient refusal (559 of 857 doses [65.2%]); the refusal rate was higher for subcutaneous anticoagulants than for all other medication categories (82.7% versus 58.8%, p < 0.001). Doses of antiretrovirals, immunosuppressives, antihypertensives, psychiatric medications, analgesics, and antiepileptics were less commonly missed than doses of electrolytes, vitamins, and gastrointestinal medications.

CONCLUSION

Scheduled doses of subcutaneous anticoagulants for hospitalized patients were more likely to be missed than doses of all other medication types.

Effect of Real-time Patient-Centered Education Bundle on Administration of Venous Thromboembolism Prevention in Hospitalized Patients

IMPORTANCE

Numerous interventions have improved prescription of venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis; however, many prescribed doses are not administered to hospitalized patients, primarily owing to patient refusal.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a real-time, targeted, patient-centered education bundle intervention to reduce nonadministration of VTE prophylaxis.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This nonrandomized controlled, preintervention-postintervention comparison trial included 19 652 patient visits on 16 units at The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland, from April 1 through December 31, 2015. Data analysis was performed from June 1, 2016, through November 30, 2017, on an intention-to-treat basis.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients on 4 intervention units received a patient-centered education bundle if a dose of VTE prophylaxis medication was not administered. Patients on 12 control units received no intervention.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Conditional odds of nonadministration of doses of VTE prophylaxis (primary outcome) before and after the intervention on control vs intervention units. Reasons for nonadministration (ie, patient refusal and other) and VTE event rates (secondary outcomes) were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 19 652 patient visits where at least 1 dose of VTE prophylaxis was prescribed were included (51.7% men; mean [SD] age, 55.6 [17.1] years). Preintervention and postintervention groups were relatively similar in age, sex, race, and medical or surgery unit. From the preintervention period to the postintervention period, on intervention units, the conditional odds of VTE prophylaxis nonadministration declined significantly (9.1% [95% CI, 5.2%-16.2%] vs 5.6% [95% CI, 3.1%-9.9%]; odds ratio [OR], 0.57; 95% CI, 0.48-0.67) compared with no change on control units (13.6% [95% CI, 9.8%-18.7%] vs 13.3% [95% CI, 9.6%-18.5%]; OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.91-1.07; P < .001 for interaction). The conditional odds of nonadministration owing to patient refusal decreased significantly on intervention units (5.9% [95% CI, 2.6%-13.6%] vs 3.4% [95% CI, 1.5%-7.8%]; OR, 0.53; 95% CI ,0.43-0.65) compared with no change on control units (8.7% [95% CI, 5.4%-14.0%] vs 8.5% [95% CI, 5.3%-13.8%]; OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.89-1.08; P < .001 for interaction). On intervention units, the conditional odds of nonadministration owing to reasons other than patient refusal decreased (2.3% [95% CI, 1.5%-3.4%] vs 1.7% [95% CI, 1.1%-2.6%]; OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58-0.94), with no change on control units (3.4% [95% CI, 2.7%-4.4%] vs 3.3% [95% CI, 2.6%-4.2%]; OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.87-1.10; P = .04 for interaction). No differential effect occurred on medical vs surgical units (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.60-1.23; P = .41 for interaction). There was no statistical difference in the proportion of VTE events among patients on intervention vs control units (0.30% vs 0.18%; OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.16-2.23).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, a targeted patient-centered education bundle significantly reduced nonadministration of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis in hospitalized patients. This novel strategy improves health care quality by leveraging electronic data to target interventions in real time for at-risk patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02402881.

Thoracic Epidural Anesthesia and Prophylactic Three Times Daily Unfractionated Heparin Within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Pathway for Colorectal Surgery

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common cause of preventable harm. Perioperative thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) presents a challenge to optimal VTE prophylaxis. Our primary aim was to characterize missed doses of VTE prophylaxis associated with epidural catheter placement and removal. Our secondary aim was to measure the effect of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway on the rate of TEA-associated missed VTE prophylaxis.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed a prospectively collected database of 1264 colorectal surgery patients at a single academic center. Missed preoperative doses between TEA patients and non-TEA patients were compared. Missed postoperative unfractionated heparin (UFH) doses associated with epidural removal were compared before and after implementation of an ERAS program. Other data collected included demographic data, surgical indication, and thrombohemorrhagic complications.

RESULTS

Of the 445 TEA patients, 12.6% missed their preoperative heparin doses compared with 8.4% of patients without epidurals (P = 0.017). Of the TEA patients prescribed 3 times daily UFH, 22.5% missed one or more doses associated with epidural removal. The percent of patients missing at least one dose of UFH on epidural removal dropped from 28.1% before ERAS to 17.9% after the ERAS program (P = 0.023). Seven patients developed VTEs. There were zero epidural hematomas.

CONCLUSIONS

Thoracic epidural analgesia was associated with a 1.5-fold increased risk of missed dose of preoperative VTE prophylaxis, which was not affected by implementation of an ERAS program. The implementation of an ERAS program reduced missed doses associated with epidural removal. This study highlights the challenge posed by providing VTE prophylaxis in the setting of perioperative neuraxial analgesia.

Effectiveness of two distinct web-based education tools for bedside nurses on medication administration practice for venous thromboembolism prevention: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common cause of preventable harm in hospitalized patients. While numerous successful interventions have been implemented to improve prescription of VTE prophylaxis, a substantial proportion of doses of prescribed preventive medications are not administered to hospitalized patients. The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of nurse education on medication administration practice.

METHODS

This was a double-blinded, cluster randomized trial in 21 medical or surgical floors of 933 nurses at The Johns Hopkins Hospital, an academic medical center, from April 1, 2014 -March 31, 2015. Nurses were cluster-randomized by hospital floor to receive either a linear static education (Static) module with voiceover or an interactive learner-centric dynamic scenario-based education (Dynamic) module. The primary and secondary outcomes were non-administration of prescribed VTE prophylaxis medication and nurse-reported satisfaction with education modules, respectively.

RESULTS

Overall, non-administration improved significantly following education (12.4% vs. 11.1%, conditional OR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.80-0.95, p = 0.002) achieving our primary objective. The reduction in non-administration was greater for those randomized to the Dynamic arm (10.8% vs. 9.2%, conditional OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.72-0.95) versus the Static arm (14.5% vs. 13.5%, conditional OR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.81-1.03), although the difference between arms was not statistically significant (p = 0.26). Satisfaction scores were significantly higher (p<0.05) for all survey items for nurses in the Dynamic arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Education for nurses significantly improves medication administration practice. Dynamic learner-centered education is more effective at engaging nurses. These findings suggest that education should be tailored to the learner.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02301793.