Translating knowledge on best practice into improving quality of RRT care: a systematic review of implementation strategies

'It depends': what 86 systematic reviews tell us about what strategies to use to support the use of research in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

The gap between research findings and clinical practice is well documented and a range of strategies have been developed to support the implementation of research into clinical practice. The objective of this study was to update and extend two previous reviews of systematic reviews of strategies designed to implement research evidence into clinical practice.

METHODS

We developed a comprehensive systematic literature search strategy based on the terms used in the previous reviews to identify studies that looked explicitly at interventions designed to turn research evidence into practice. The search was performed in June 2022 in four electronic databases: Medline, Embase, Cochrane and Epistemonikos. We searched from January 2010 up to June 2022 and applied no language restrictions. Two independent reviewers appraised the quality of included studies using a quality assessment checklist. To reduce the risk of bias, papers were excluded following discussion between all members of the team. Data were synthesised using descriptive and narrative techniques to identify themes and patterns linked to intervention strategies, targeted behaviours, study settings and study outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 32 reviews conducted between 2010 and 2022. The reviews are mainly of multi-faceted interventions (n = 20) although there are reviews focusing on single strategies (ICT, educational, reminders, local opinion leaders, audit and feedback, social media and toolkits). The majority of reviews report strategies achieving small impacts (normally on processes of care). There is much less evidence that these strategies have shifted patient outcomes. Furthermore, a lot of nuance lies behind these headline findings, and this is increasingly commented upon in the reviews themselves.

DISCUSSION

Combined with the two previous reviews, 86 systematic reviews of strategies to increase the implementation of research into clinical practice have been identified. We need to shift the emphasis away from isolating individual and multi-faceted interventions to better understanding and building more situated, relational and organisational capability to support the use of research in clinical practice. This will involve drawing on a wider range of research perspectives (including social science) in primary studies and diversifying the types of synthesis undertaken to include approaches such as realist synthesis which facilitate exploration of the context in which strategies are employed.

Redox Signaling in Chronic Kidney Disease-Associated Cachexia

Redox signaling alterations contribute to chronic kidney disease (CKD)-associated cachexia. This review aims to summarize studies about redox pathophysiology in CKD-associated cachexia and muscle wasting and to discuss potential therapeutic approaches based on antioxidant and anti-inflammatory molecules to restore redox homeostasis. Enzymatic and non-enzymatic systems of antioxidant molecules have been studied in experimental models of kidney diseases and patients with CKD. Oxidative stress is increased by several factors present in CKD, including uremic toxins, inflammation, and metabolic and hormone alterations, leading to muscle wasting. Rehabilitative nutritional and physical exercises have shown beneficial effects for CKD-associated cachexia. Anti-inflammatory molecules have also been tested in experimental models of CKD. The importance of oxidative stress has been shown by experimental studies in which antioxidant therapies ameliorated CKD and its associated complications in the 5/6 nephrectomy model. Treatment of CKD-associated cachexia is a challenge and further studies are necessary to investigate potential therapies involving antioxidant therapy.

Rehabilitation Nutrition in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease and Cachexia

Rehabilitation nutrition is a proposed intervention strategy to improve nutritional status and physical function. However, rehabilitation nutrition in patients with cachexia and protein-energy wasting (PEW), which are the main nutrition-related problems in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), has not been fully clarified. Therefore, this review aimed to summarize the current evidence and interventions related to rehabilitation nutrition for cachexia and PEW in patients with CKD. CKD is a serious condition worldwide, with a significant impact on patient prognosis. In addition, CKD is easily complicated by nutrition-related problems such as cachexia and PEW owing to disease background- and treatment-related factors, which can further worsen the prognosis. Although nutritional management and exercise therapy are reportedly effective for cachexia and PEW, the effectiveness of combined nutrition and exercise interventions is less clear. In the future, rehabilitation nutrition addressing the nutritional problems associated with CKD will become more widespread as more scientific evidence accumulates. In clinical practice, early intervention in patients with CKD involving both nutrition and exercise after appropriate assessment may be necessary to improve patient outcomes.

Chronic Kidney Disease and Nutrition Support

Individuals with chronic kidney disease (CKD), particularly those undergoing maintenance dialysis, are prone to protein-energy wasting (PEW), the latter of which can be ameliorated with different methods of nutrition support. Dietary counseling guided by dietitians is the key for preventing and managing PEW in CKD. If dietary counseling per se fails to meet the recommended energy and protein requirements, the addition of oral nutrition supplements (ONSs) would be necessary. When these initial measures cannot attain the recommended energy and protein requirements, nutrition support, including enteral tube feeding or parenteral nutrition (PN), should be considered as a viable option to improve nutrition status. Partial PN, comprising intraperitoneal PN (IPPN) and intradialytic PN (IDPN) therapies, may be attempted as supplemental nutrition support in patients with PEW requiring peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis, respectively. Despite the debatable effectiveness of IPPN for patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis, it remains a feasible means in these patients. The indications for IPPN in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis include inadequate dietary intake of energy and protein, and barriers of oral intake and other forms of enteral supplementation such as issues with suitability, tolerance, and compliance. Nonetheless, in the case of spontaneous dietary consumption of energy and protein meeting the difference between the IDPN provision and the nutrition targets, the use of IDPN is rational. In patients with PEW and malfunctioning gastrointestinal tract, as well as those whose enteral intake (with or without partial PN) is below the recommended nutrient requirements, total PN becomes a relevant nutrition intervention.

Practice Variation in Skin Cancer Treatment and Follow-Up Care: A Dutch Claims Database Analysis

BACKGROUND

Quality indicators are used to benchmark and subsequently improve quality of healthcare. However, defining good quality indicators and applying them to high-volume care such as skin cancer is not always feasible.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether claims data could be used to benchmark high-volume skin cancer care and to assess clinical practice variation.

METHODS

All skin cancer care-related claims in dermatology in 2016 were extracted from a nationwide claims database (Vektis) in the Netherlands.

RESULTS

For over 220,000 patients, a skin cancer diagnosis-related group was reimbursed in 124 healthcare centres. Conventional excision reflected 75% of treatments for skin cancer but showed large variation between practices. Large practice variation was also found for 5-fluorouracil and imiquimod creams. The practice variation of Mohs micrographic surgery and photodynamic therapy was low under the 75th percentile, but outliers at the 100th percentile were detected, which indicates that few centres performed these therapies far more often than average. On average, patients received 1.8 follow-up visits in 2016.

CONCLUSIONS

Claims data demonstrated large practice variation in treatments and follow-up visits of skin cancer and may be a valid and feasible data set to extract quality indicators. The next step is to investigate whether detected practice variation is unwarranted and if a reduction improves quality and efficiency of care.

A short cultural history of the UK Renal Registry 1995-2020

The Renal Association UK Renal Registry (UKRR), established in 1995, has reflected the development of Nephrology within the NHS over 25 years. It has been gradually enlarged to provide a formal agency for a range of consensus initiatives. It remains the source of the national epidemiology of renal replacement, feeding NHS infrastructures and Health Services Research. An extension into acute and chronic kidney disorders is in hand. As a template for medical audit it has contributed to a quality improvement ethos derived from several methodologies. It now offers a multifaceted virtual platform for special interest groups and patient-centricity. Its transformation demonstrates one of the compromises that have permitted specialty development within the inconstant envelope of the NHS.

If not always a bellwether, the clarity, form and scale of kidney disease provision still qualifies the UKRR as a demonstrator of healthcare possibilities to Medicine, Clinical Informatics and the NHS.

Current practice in dialysis central venous catheter management: Multi-disciplinary renal team perspectives

AIM

To explore the current practices related to the insertion, management and removal of dialysis central venous catheters (CVCs) used in patients with chronic kidney disease requiring haemodialysis.

METHODS

This qualitative descriptive study involved semi-structured interviews with surgeons, interventional radiologists, renal physicians, dialysis nurses, renal access nurses and renal researchers involved in the care of patients with chronic kidney disease requiring haemodialysis. Data were collected from staff at eight hospitals in six states and territories of Australia. Thirty-eight face-to-face interviews were conducted. A modified five-step qualitative content analysis approach was used to analyse the data.

RESULTS

Improved visualization technology and its use by interventional radiologists has steered insertions to specialist teams in specialist locations. This is thought to have decreased risk and improved patient outcomes. Nurses were identified as the professional group responsible for maintaining catheter access integrity, preventing access failure and reducing access-related complications. While best practice was considered important, justifications for variations in practice related to local patient and environment challenges were identified.

CONCLUSION

The interdisciplinary team is central in the insertion, maintenance, removal and education of patients regarding dialysis CVCs. Clinicians temper research-based decision-making about central dialysis access catheter management with knowledge of individual, environmental and patient factors. Strategies to ensure guidelines are appropriately translated for use in a wide variety of settings are necessary for patient safety.

Variations and characteristics of quality indicators for maintenance hemodialysis patients: A systematic review

AIMS

Several quality indicators (QIs) to improve the quality of practice for hemodialysis patients have been implemented. However, the variations and characteristics of these indicators in terms of their use and feasibility have not been investigated. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the variations and characteristics of existing QIs for maintenance hemodialysis patients.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search of MEDLINE via PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL, without date limits, on February 26, 2016. We selected the English-written articles regarding QIs for patients aged ≥18 years who were on maintenance hemodialysis therapy ≥3 months, and extracted the definition and development process of the reported QIs. We categorized each indicator into one of four types, namely, structure, process, surrogate outcome, and outcome, and assessed the data sources that were necessary to measure it.

RESULTS

We included 70 articles and identified 101 indicators, and found that most of the consensus processes for selecting indicators were unclear. We also found that most indicators were not process indicators and that the measurement of some indicators required a chart review, which limits their use and feasibility.

CONCLUSIONS

Development of QIs for hemodialysis patients in the future should use a definitive consensus process and consider process-centered indicators that can be measured automatically using claims data and test results contained in electronic medical records, to improve usability and feasibility.

ESRD Databases, Public Policy, and Quality of Care: Translational Medicine and Nephrology

Efforts to improve care of patients with ESRD and the policies that guide those activities depend on evidence-based best practices derived from clinical trials and carefully conducted observational studies. Our review describes this process in the context of the translational research model (bench to bedside to populations), with a particular emphasis on bedside care. We illustrate some of its accomplishments and describe the limitations of the data and evidence supporting policy and practice.

Continuous quality improvement in nephrology: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Continuous quality improvement (CQI) has been successfully applied in business and engineering for over 60 years. While using CQI techniques within nephrology has received increased attention, little is known about where, and with what measure of success, CQI can be attributed to improving outcomes within nephrology care. This is particularly important as payors' focus on value-based healthcare and reimbursement is tied to achieving quality improvement thresholds. We conducted a systematic review of CQI applications in nephrology.

METHODS

Studies were identified from PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, Google Scholar, ProQuest Dissertation Abstracts and sources of grey literature (i.e., available in print/electronic format but not controlled by commercial publishers) between January 1, 2004 and October 13, 2014. We developed a systematic evaluation protocol and pre-defined criteria for review. All citations were reviewed by two reviewers with disagreements resolved by consensus.

RESULTS

We initially identified 468 publications; 40 were excluded as duplicates or not available/not in English. An additional 352 did not meet criteria for full review due to: 1. Not meeting criteria for inclusion = 196 (e.g., reviews, news articles, editorials) 2. Not nephrology-specific = 153, 3. Only available as abstracts = 3. Of 76 publications meeting criteria for full review, the majority [45 (61%)] focused on ESRD care. 74% explicitly stated use of specific CQI tools in their methods. The highest number of publications in a given year occurred in 2011 with 12 (16%) articles. 89% of studies were found in biomedical and allied health journals and most studies were performed in North America (52%). Only one was randomized and controlled although not blinded.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite calls for healthcare reform and funding to inspire innovative research, we found few high quality studies either rigorously evaluating the use of CQI in nephrology or reporting best practices. More rigorous research is needed to assess the mechanisms and attributes by which CQI impacts outcomes before there is further promotion of its use for improvement and reimbursement purposes.

Value-based integrated (renal) care: setting a development agenda for research and implementation strategies

BACKGROUND

Integrated care services are considered a vital strategy for improving the Triple Aim values for people with chronic kidney disease. However, a solid scholarly explanation of how to develop, implement and evaluate such value-based integrated renal care services is limited. The aim of this study was to develop a framework to identify the strategies and outcomes for the implementation of value-based integrated renal care.

METHODS

First, the theoretical foundations of the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care and the Triple Aim were united into one overarching framework through an iterative process of key-informant consultations. Second, a rapid review approach was conducted to identify the published research on integrated renal care, and the Cochrane Library, Medline, Scopus, and Business Source Premier databases were searched for pertinent articles published between 2000 and 2015. Based on the framework, a coding schema was developed to synthesis the included articles.

RESULTS

The overarching framework distinguishes the integrated care domains: 1) type of integration, 2) enablers of integration and the interrelated outcome domains, 3) experience of care, 4) population health and 5) costs. The literature synthesis indicated that integrated renal care implementation strategies have particularly focused on micro clinical processes and physical outcomes, while little emphasis has been placed on meso organisational as well as macro system integration processes. In addition, evidence regarding patients' perceived outcomes and economic outcomes has been weak.

CONCLUSION

These results underscore that the future challenge for researchers is to explore which integrated care implementation strategies achieve better health and improved experience of care at a lower cost within a specific context. For this purpose, this study's framework and evidence synthesis have set a developmental agenda for both integrated renal care practice and research. Accordingly, we plan further work to develop an implementation model for value-based integrated renal services.

What are effective strategies for the implementation of care bundles on ICUs: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Care bundles have proven to be effective in improving clinical outcomes. It is not known which strategies are the most effective to implement care bundles. A systematic review was conducted to determine the strategies used to implement care bundles in adult intensive care units and to assess the effects of these strategies when implementing bundles.

METHODS

The databases MEDLINE/PubMed, Ovid/Embase, CINAHL and CENTRAL were searched for eligible studies until January 31, 2015. Studies with (non)randomised designs on central line, ventilator or sepsis bundles were included if implementation strategies and bundle compliance were reported. Methodological quality was assessed by using the Downs and Black checklist. Data extraction and quality assessments were independently performed by two reviewers.

RESULTS

In total, 1533 records were screened and 47 studies were finally included. In 49 %, pre/post designs were used, 38 % prospective cohorts, and the remaining studies used retrospective designs (6 %), interrupted time series (4 %) and longitudinal designs (2 %). The methodological quality was classified as 'fair' in 77 %, and the remaining as 'good' (13 %) and 'poor' (11 %). The most frequently used strategies were education (86 %), reminders (71 %) and audit and feedback (63 %). Our results show that compliance is influenced by multiple factors, i.e. types and numbers of elements varied and different compliance measurements were reported. Furthermore, compliance was calculated within different time frames. Also, detailed information about compliance, such as numerators and denominators, was not reported. Therefore, recalculation of consistent monthly compliance levels was not possible.

CONCLUSIONS

The three most frequently used strategies were education, reminders and audit and feedback. We conclude that the heterogeneity among the included studies was high due to the variety in study designs, number and types of elements and types of compliance measurements. Due to the heterogeneity of the data and the poor quality of the studies, conclusions about which strategy results in the highest levels of bundle compliance could not be determined. We strongly recommend that studies in quality improvement should be reported in a formalised way in order to be able to compare research findings. It is imperative that authors follow the standards for quality improvement reporting excellence (SQUIRE) guidelines whenever they report quality improvement studies.

Development of a hemodialysis safety checklist using a structured panel process

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization created a Surgical Safety Checklist with a pause or "time out" to help reduce preventable adverse events and improve communication. A similar tool might improve patient safety and reduce treatment-associated morbidity in the hemodialysis unit.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a Hemodialysis Safety Checklist (Hemo Pause) for daily use by nurses and patients.

DESIGN

A modified Delphi consensus technique based on the RAND method was used to evaluate and revise the checklist.

SETTING

University-affiliated in-center hemodialysis unit.

PARTICIPANTS

A multidisciplinary team of physicians, nurses, and administrators developed the initial version of the Hemo Pause Checklist. The evaluation team consisted of 20 registered hemodialysis nurses.

MEASUREMENTS

The top 5 hemodialysis safety measures according to hemodialysis nurses. A 75% agreement threshold was required for consensus.

METHODS

The structured panel process was iterative, consisting of a literature review to identify safety parameters, individual rating of each parameter by the panel of hemodialysis nurses, an in-person consensus meeting wherein the panel refined the parameters, and a final anonymous survey that assessed panel consensus.

RESULTS

The literature review produced 31 patient safety parameters. Individual review by panelists reduced the list to 25 parameters, followed by further reduction to 19 at the in-person consensus meeting. The final round of scoring yielded the following top 5 safety measures: 1) confirmation of patient identity, 2) measurement of pre-dialysis weight, 3) recognition and transcription of new medical orders, 4) confirmation of dialysate composition based on prescription, and 5) measurement of pre-dialysis blood pressure. Revision using human factors principles incorporated the 19 patient safety parameters with greater than or equal to 75% consensus into a final checklist of 17-items.

LIMITATIONS

The literature review was not systematic. This was a single-center study, and the panel lacked patient and family representation.

CONCLUSIONS

A novel 17-item Hemodialysis Safety Checklist (Hemo Pause) for use by nurses and patients has been developed to standardize the hemodialysis procedure. Further quality improvement efforts are underway to explore the feasibility of using this checklist to reduce adverse events and strengthen the safety culture in the hemodialysis unit.

Effect of a drug allergy educational program and antibiotic prescribing guideline on inpatient clinical providers' antibiotic prescribing knowledge

BACKGROUND

Inpatient providers have varying levels of knowledge in managing patients with drug and/or penicillin (PCN) allergy.

OBJECTIVES

Our objectives were (1) to survey inpatient providers to ascertain their baseline drug allergy knowledge and preparedness in caring for patients with PCN allergy, and (2) to assess the impact of an educational program paired with the implementation of a hospital-based clinical guideline.

METHODS

We electronically surveyed 521 inpatient providers at a tertiary care medical center at baseline and again 6 weeks after an educational initiative paired with clinical guideline implementation. The guideline informed providers on drug allergy history taking and antibiotic prescribing for inpatients with PCN or cephalosporin allergy.

RESULTS

Of 323 unique responders, 42% (95% CI, 37-48%) reported no prior education in drug allergy. When considering those who responded to both surveys (n = 213), we observed a significant increase in knowledge about PCN skin testing (35% vs 54%; P < .001) and loss of PCN allergy over time (54% vs 80%; P < .0001). Among those who reported attending an educational session (n = 62), preparedness to determine if an allergy was severe significantly improved (77% vs 92%; P = .03). Other areas, including understanding absolute contraindications to receiving a drug again and PCN cross-reactivity with other antimicrobials, did not improve significantly.

CONCLUSIONS

Inpatient providers have drug allergy knowledge deficits but are interested in tools to help them care for inpatients with drug allergies. Our educational initiative and hospital guideline implementation were associated with increased PCN allergy knowledge in several crucial areas. To improve care of inpatients with drug allergy, more research is needed to evaluate hospital policies and sustainable educational tools.

Barriers to Adopting a Fistula-First Policy in Europe: An International Survey among National Experts

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to explore how vascular access care was reimbursed, promoted, and organised at the national level in European and neighbouring countries.

Methods

An electronic survey among national experts to collect country-level data.

Results

Forty-seven experts (response rate, 76%) from 37 countries participated. Experts from 23 countries reported that 50% or less of patients received routine pre-operative imaging of vessels. Nephrologists placed catheters and created fistulas in 26 and 8 countries, respectively. Twenty-one countries had a fee per created access; the reported fee for catheter placement was never higher than for fistula creation. As the number of haemodialysis patients in a centre increased, more countries had a dedicated coordinator or multidisciplinary team responsible for vascular access maintenance at the centre-level; in 11 countries, responsibility was always with individual nephrologists, independent of a centre's size. In 23 countries, dialysis centres shared vascular access care resources, with facilitation from a service provider in 4. In most countries, national campaigns (n = 35) or educational programmes (n = 29) had addressed vascular access-related topics; 19 countries had some form of training for creating fistulas. Forty experts considered the current evidence base robust enough to justify a fistula-first policy, but only 13 believed that more than 80% of nephrologists in their country would attempt a fistula in a 75-year-old woman with comorbidities.

Conclusions

Suboptimal access to surgical resources, lack of dedicated training of clinicians, limited routine use of pre-operative diagnostic imaging and patient characteristics primarily emerged as potential barriers to adopting a fistula-first policy in Europe.

Measuring the quality of renal care: things to keep in mind when selecting and using quality indicators

This educational paper discusses a variety of indicators that can be used to measure the quality of care in renal medicine. Based on what aspect of care they reflect, indicators can be grouped into four main categories: structure, process, surrogate outcome and outcome indicators. Each category has its own advantages and disadvantages, and we give some pointers on how to balance these pros and cons while taking into account the aim of the measurement initiative. Especially within initiatives that link payment or reputation to indicator measurement, this balancing should be done with utmost care to avoid potential, unintended consequences. Furthermore, we suggest consideration of (i) a causal chain-i.e. subsequent aspects of care connected by evidence-based links-as a starting point for composing a performance indicator set and (ii) adequate case-mix adjustment, not only of (surrogate) outcomes, but also of process indicators in order to obtain fair comparisons between facilities and within facilities over time.

Renal replacement therapy registries--time for a structured data quality evaluation programme

Registries in the area of renal replacement therapy (RRT) are intended to be a tool for epidemiological research, health care planning and improvement of quality of care. In this perspective, the value of a population-based RRT registry and its ability to achieve its goals rely heavily on the quality of its data and on quality control procedures. Data quality is of crucial importance to prevent 'garbage coming out from garbage going in'. Regular evaluations of the data quality within these registries are needed to assess various aspects of data quality like completeness, prevention of duplicates, data validity, comparability, timeliness, usefulness and responsiveness of different items and accuracy of reporting and interpretation. In this technical note, we will discuss the purposes of RRT registries and the importance of different aspects of data quality in relation to those purposes. In addition, we discuss how these data quality aspects can be assessed and, where possible, how data quality may be improved.

Learning from practice variation to improve the quality of care

Modern medicine is complex and delivered by interdependent teams. Conscious redesign of the way in which these teams interact can contribute to improving the quality of care by reducing practice variation. This requires techniques that are different to those used for individual patient care. In this paper, we describe some of these quality improvement (QI) techniques. The first section deals with the identification of practice variation as the starting point of a systematic QI endeavour. This involves collecting data in multiple centres on a set of quality indicators as well as on case-mix variables that are thought to affect those indicators. Reporting the collected indicator data in longitudinal run charts supports teams in monitoring the effect of their QI effort. After identifying the opportunities for improvement, the second section discusses how to reduce practice variation. This includes selecting the 'package' of clinical actions to implement, identifying subsidiary actions to achieve the improvement aim, designing the implementation strategy and ways to incentivise QI.