Development and Content Validation of a Multidisciplinary Standardized Management Pathway for Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure and Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Acceptability of the Venting Wisely pathway for use in critically ill adults with hypoxaemic respiratory failure and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS): a qualitative study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Hypoxaemic respiratory failure (HRF) affects nearly 15% of critically ill adults admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). An evidence-based, stakeholder-informed multidisciplinary care pathway (Venting Wisely) was created to standardise the diagnosis and management of patients with HRF and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Successful adherence to the pathway requires a coordinated team-based approach by the clinician team. The overall aim of this study is to describe the acceptability of the Venting Wisely pathway among critical care clinicians. Specifically, this will allow us to (1) better understand the user's experience with the intervention and (2) determine if the intervention was delivered as intended.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This qualitative study will conduct focus groups with nurse practitioners, physicians, registered nurses and registered respiratory therapists from 17 Alberta ICUs. We will use template analysis to describe the acceptability of a multicomponent care pathway according to seven constructs of acceptability: (1) affective attitude;,(2) burden, (3) ethicality, (4) intervention coherence, (5) opportunity costs, (6) perceived effectiveness and (7) self-efficacy. This study will contribute to a better understanding of the acceptability of the Venting Wisely pathway. Identification of areas of poor acceptability will be used to refine the pathway and implementation strategies as ways to improve adherence to the pathway and promote its sustainability.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the University of Calgary Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at a scientific conference.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04744298.

Designing a Behaviour Change Wheel guided implementation strategy for a hypoxaemic respiratory failure and ARDS care pathway that targets barriers

BACKGROUND

A significant gap exists between ideal evidence-based practice and real-world application of evidence-informed therapies for patients with hypoxaemic respiratory failure (HRF) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Pathways can improve the quality of care provided by helping integrate and organise the use of evidence informed practices, but barriers exist that can influence their adoption and successful implementation. We sought to identify barriers to the implementation of a best practice care pathway for HRF and ARDS and design an implementation science-based strategy targeting these barriers that is tailored to the critical care setting.

METHODS

The intervention assessed was a previously described multidisciplinary, evidence-based, stakeholder-informed, integrated care pathway for HRF and ARDS. A survey questionnaire (12 open text questions) was administered to intensive care unit (ICU) clinicians (physicians, nurses, respiratory therapists) in 17 adult ICUs across Alberta. The Behaviour Change Wheel, capability, opportunity, motivation - behaviour components, and Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) were used to perform qualitative analysis on open text responses to identify barriers to the use of the pathway. Behaviour change technique (BCT) taxonomy, and Affordability, Practicality, Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, Acceptability, Side effects and safety and Equity (APEASE) criteria were used to design an implementation science-based strategy specific to the critical care context.

RESULTS

Survey responses (692) resulted in 16 belief statements and 9 themes with 9 relevant TDF domains. Differences in responses between clinician professional group and hospital setting were common. Based on intervention functions linked to each belief statement and its relevant TDF domain, 26 candidate BCTs were identified and evaluated using APEASE criteria. 23 BCTs were selected and grouped to form 8 key components of a final strategy: Audit and feedback, education, training, clinical decision support, site champions, reminders, implementation support and empowerment. The final strategy was described using the template for intervention description and replication framework.

CONCLUSIONS

Barriers to a best practice care pathway were identified and were amenable to the design of an implementation science-based mitigation strategy. Future work will evaluate the ability of this strategy to improve quality of care by assessing clinician behaviour change via better adherence to evidence-based care.

Perioperative Optimization of the Cardiac Surgical Patient

Perioperative optimization of cardiac surgical patients is imperative to reduce complications, utilize health care resources efficiently, and improve patient recovery and quality of life. Standardized application of evidence-based best practices can lead to better outcomes. Although many practices should be applied universally to all patients, there are also opportunities along the surgical journey to identify patients who will benefit from additional interventions that will further ameliorate their recovery. Enhanced recovery programs aim to bundle several process elements in a standardized fashion to optimize outcomes after cardiac surgery. A foundational concept of enhanced recovery is attaining a better postsurgical end point for patients, in less time, through achievement and maintenance in their greatest possible physiologic, functional, and psychological state. Perioperative optimization is a broad topic, spanning multiple phases of care and involving a variety of medical specialties and nonphysician health care providers. In this review we highlight a variety of perioperative care topics, in which a comprehensive approach to patient care can lead to improved results for patients, providers, and the health care system. A particular focus on patient-centred care is included. Although existing evidence supports all of the elements reviewed, most require further improvements in implementation, as well as additional research, before their full potential and usefulness can be determined.

Underrepresentation of Respiratory Therapists as Experts in Delphi Studies on Respiratory Practices and Research Priorities

Delphi survey techniques are a common consensus method used to collect feedback from an expert panel to inform practices, establish guidelines, and identify research priorities. Collecting respiratory therapists' (RT) expertise and experiences as part of consensus-building methodologies is one way to ensure that they align with RT practices and to better influence respiratory care practice. This narrative review aimed to report the RT representation in expert panels of Delphi studies focused on respiratory therapy practices and research priorities. The research question that guided this review is: to what extent are RTs included as expert participants among published Delphi studies relate to respiratory therapy and research topics? We conducted a structured search of the literature and identified 23 papers that reported Delphi studies related to respiratory care practices and 15 that reported on respiratory-related research priorities. Delphi studies that focused on reporting consensus on respiratory care practices included the following: (1) mechanical ventilation, (2) high-flow nasal cannula therapy, (3) COVID-19 respiratory management, (4) home oxygen therapy, (5) cardiopulmonary monitoring, and (6) disease-specific guidelines. Delphi studies that focused on establishing respiratory research priorities included the following: (1) theory and practice-orientated knowledge gaps, and (2) priority research topics for empirical investigation. The results of this review suggest that RTs were rarely included as expert participants and, when involved, were minimally represented (5% to 33%). Given RTs' diverse and relevant experience in respiratory care, incorporating their perspectives to inform future education, respiratory care practices, and research priorities would allow evidence to better align with knowledge gaps deemed important for the respiratory therapy profession.