Financial incentives to promote health care quality: the hospital acquired conditions nonpayment policy

Identifying a list of healthcare 'never events' to effect system change: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND

Never events (NEs) are patient safety incidents that are preventable and so serious they should never happen. To reduce NEs, several frameworks have been introduced over the past two decades; however, NEs and their harms continue to occur. These frameworks have varying events, terminology and preventability, which hinders collaboration. This systematic review aims to identify the most serious and preventable events for targeted improvement efforts by answering the following questions: Which patient safety events are most frequently classified as never events? Which ones are most commonly described as entirely preventable?

METHODS

For this narrative synthesis systematic review we searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central and CINAHL for articles published from 1 January 2001 to 27 October 2021. We included papers of any study design or article type (excluding press releases/announcements) that listed NEs or an existing NE framework.

RESULTS

Our analyses included 367 reports identifying 125 unique NEs. Those most frequently reported were surgery on the wrong body part, wrong surgical procedure, unintentionally retained foreign objects and surgery on the wrong patient. Researchers classified 19.4% of NEs as 'wholly preventable'. Those most included in this category were surgery on the wrong body part or patient, wrong surgical procedure, improper administration of a potassium-containing solution and wrong-route administration of medication (excluding chemotherapy).

CONCLUSIONS

To improve collaboration and facilitate learning from errors, we need a single list that focuses on the most preventable and serious NEs. Our review shows that surgery on the wrong body part or patient, or the wrong surgical procedure best meet these criteria.

The Effect of Chlorhexidine Bathing on Rates of Nosocomial Infections Among the Critically Ill Population: An Analysis of Current Clinical Research and Recommendations for Practice

BACKGROUND

This literature review examined the current research of evidence-based standards to evaluate the effectiveness of daily bathing with 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG; manufactured by Sage Products Inc) compared with traditional non-antimicrobial bathing on reducing the incidence of nosocomial infections in the critically ill population.

OBJECTIVE/AIM

The objective of this article is 3-fold: first, to provide a background on the increased susceptibility to pathogens that have become endemic in many intensive care units; second, to challenge health care providers to question current practice and consider additional ways to ensure safety and better outcomes in the critically ill population; and third, to provide health care providers with clinical evidence to avoid infection control failures.

METHOD

To determine whether published standards for daily patient bathing exist, a search was conducted of bibliographic databases for articles published within the last 5 years (2010-2015). Ultimately, 3 large multicenter cluster randomized controlled studies were chosen to compare the outcomes of daily bathing with 2% CHG cloths with those of daily bathing with non-antimicrobial cloths.

RESULTS

The side-by-side comparison of the studies revealed similar outcomes, but with variations in study design. Climo et al (2013) and Milestone et al (2013) recommended the implementation of daily bathing with 2% CHG washcloths as a strategy to decrease nosocomial infections in the critically ill population. Huang et al (2013) recommended universal decolonization as the most effective method to decrease nosocomial infections.

DISCUSSION

The analysis of the 3 primary studies revealed similar findings that support the recommendation for the implementation of daily bathing with 2% CHG in the critically ill population. Further research will inform clinicians on the susceptibility of bacteria to CHG and the probability of creating microbial resistance.

A realist analysis of hospital patient safety in Wales: applied learning for alternative contexts from a multisite case study

Background

Hospital patient safety is a major social problem. In the UK, policy responses focus on the introduction of improvement programmes that seek to implement evidence-based clinical practices using the Model for Improvement, Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle. Empirical evidence that the outcomes of such programmes vary across hospitals demonstrates that the context of their implementation matters. However, the relationships between features of context and the implementation of safety programmes are both undertheorised and poorly understood in empirical terms.

Objectives

This study is designed to address gaps in conceptual, methodological and empirical knowledge about the influence of context on the local implementation of patient safety programmes.

Design

We used concepts from critical realism and institutional analysis to conduct a qualitative comparative-intensive case study involving 21 hospitals across all seven Welsh health boards. We focused on the local implementation of three focal interventions from the 1000 Lives+patient safety programme: Improving Leadership for Quality Improvement, Reducing Surgical Complications and Reducing Health-care Associated Infection. Our main sources of data were 160 semistructured interviews, observation and 1700 health policy and organisational documents. These data were analysed using the realist approaches of abstraction, abduction and retroduction.

Setting

Welsh Government and NHS Wales.

Participants

Interviews were conducted with 160 participants including government policy leads, health managers and professionals, partner agencies with strategic oversight of patient safety, advocacy groups and academics with expertise in patient safety.

Main outcome measures

Identification of the contextual factors pertinent to the local implementation of the 1000 Lives+patient safety programme in Welsh NHS hospitals.

Results

An innovative conceptual framework harnessing realist social theory and institutional theory was produced to address challenges identified within previous applications of realist inquiry in patient safety research. This involved the development and use of an explanatory intervention–context–mechanism–agency–outcome (I-CMAO) configuration to illustrate the processes behind implementation of a change programme. Our findings, illustrated by multiple nested I-CMAO configurations, show how local implementation of patient safety interventions are impacted and modified by particular aspects of context: specifically, isomorphism, by which an intervention becomes adapted to the environment in which it is implemented; institutional logics, the beliefs and values underpinning the intervention and its source, and their perceived legitimacy among different groups of health-care professionals; and the relational structure and power dynamics of the functional group, that is, those tasked with implementing the initiative. This dynamic interplay shapes and guides actions leading to the normalisation or the rejection of the patient safety programme.

Conclusions

Heightened awareness of the influence of context on the local implementation of patient safety programmes is required to inform the design of such interventions and to ensure their effective implementation and operationalisation in the day-to-day practice of health-care teams. Future work is required to elaborate our conceptual model and findings in similar settings where different interventions are introduced, and in different settings where similar innovations are implemented.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Assessing the economic value of avoiding hospital admissions by shifting the management of gram+ acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections to an outpatient care setting

OBJECTIVE

To estimate, from a US payer perspective, the cost offsets of treating gram positive acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (ABSSSI) with varied hospital length of stay (LOS) followed by outpatient care, as well as the cost implications of avoiding hospital admission.

METHODS

Economic drivers of care were estimated using a literature-based economic model incorporating inpatient and outpatient components. The model incorporated equal efficacy, adverse events (AE), resource use, and costs from literature. Costs of once- and twice-daily outpatient infusions to achieve a 14-day treatment were analyzed. Sensitivity analyses were performed. Costs were adjusted to 2015 US$.

RESULTS

Total non-drug medical cost for treatment of ABSSSI entirely in the outpatient setting to avoid hospital admission was the lowest among all scenarios and ranged from $4039-$4924. Total non-drug cost for ABSSSI treated in the inpatient setting ranged from $9813 (3 days LOS) to $18,014 (7 days LOS). Inpatient vs outpatient cost breakdown was: 3 days inpatient ($6657)/11 days outpatient ($3156-$3877); 7 days inpatient ($15,017)/7 days outpatient ($2495-$2997). Sensitivity analyses revealed a key outpatient cost driver to be peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) costs (average per patient cost of $873 for placement and $205 for complications).

LIMITATIONS

Drug and indirect costs were excluded and resource use was not differentiated by ABSSSI type. It was assumed that successful ABSSSI treatment takes up to 14 days per the product labels, and that once-daily and twice-daily antibiotics have equal efficacy.

CONCLUSION

Shifting ABSSSI care to outpatient settings may result in medical cost savings greater than 53%. Typical outpatient scenarios represent 14-37% of total medical cost, with PICC accounting for 28-43% of the outpatient burden. The value of new ABSSSI therapies will be driven by eliminating the need for PICC line, reducing length of stay and the ability to completely avoid a hospital stay.

Hospital-acquired conditions in head and neck cancer surgery

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has identified 10 hospital-acquired conditions (HACs) for which they will not reimburse care. We sought to determine the incidence of HACs in head and neck cancer (HNCA) surgery and the association with in-hospital mortality, complications, length of hospitalization, and costs.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cross-sectional study.

METHODS

Discharge data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample for 123,662 patients who underwent an ablative procedure for a malignant oral cavity, laryngeal, hypopharyngeal, or oropharyngeal neoplasm during 2001-2008 were analyzed using cross-tabulations and multivariate regression modeling.

RESULTS

HACs occurred in <1% of cases, with vascular catheter-associated infection comprising >70% of all HACs. The occurrence of HACs was significantly associated with urgent or emergent admission (odds ratio [OR]=2.0, P=.004), major surgical procedures (OR=2.3, P<.001), flap reconstruction (OR=3.5, P<.001), and advanced comorbidity (OR=2.0, P<.001). There was no association between HACs and hospital size, location, ownership, volume status, or safety-net burden. HACs were significantly associated with in-hospital mortality (OR=3.8, P=.001), surgical complications (OR=4.9, P<.001), and medical complications (OR=5.6, P<.001). After controlling for all other variables, HACs were associated with significantly increased length of hospitalization and hospital-related costs, with vascular catheter-associated infection and foreign object after surgery associated with the greatest increase in length of stay and costs.

CONCLUSIONS

HACs are uncommon events in HNCA surgical patients. Because prediction of HACs is poor and the potential for human error crosses demographic, geographic, and structural boundaries, universal innovative measures to reduce the occurrence of HACs are needed.