StaRI Aims to Overcome Knowledge Translation Inertia: The Standards for Reporting Implementation Studies Guidelines

Clin-STAR corner: Practice changing advances in prescribing for geriatric emergency department patients

Reducing adverse drug events among older adults in heterogeneous and often chaotic emergency department (ED) settings requires a multidisciplinary approach. Recent research evaluates the impact of multicomponent protocols designed to reduce ED physician prescribing of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), including transdisciplinary training and leveraging electronic health records to provide real-time alternative safer pharmaceuticals while providing personalized feedback to prescribers. Most new research is not randomized trial data. Although this current research does not consistently demonstrate a reduction in the prescribing of PIMs, these studies provide a foundation for emergency medicine healthcare teams, geriatricians, and pharmacists to collaborate with health informatics to continue advancing the frontiers of safer medication prescribing during episodes of acute care.

Around the EQUATOR with clinician-scientists transdisciplinary aging research (Clin-STAR) principles: Implementation science challenges and opportunities

The Institute of Medicine and the National Institute on Aging increasingly understand that knowledge alone is necessary but insufficient to improve healthcare outcomes. Adapting the behaviors of clinicians, patients, and stakeholders to new standards of evidence-based clinical practice is often significantly delayed. In response, over the past twenty years, Implementation Science has developed as the study of methods and strategies that facilitate the uptake of evidence-based practice into regular use by practitioners and policymakers. One important advance in Implementation Science research was the development of Standards for Reporting Implementation Studies (StaRI), which provided a 27-item checklist for researchers to consistently report essential elements of the implementation and intervention strategies. Using StaRI as a framework, this review discusses specific Implementation Science challenges for research with older adults, provides solutions for those obstacles, and opportunities to improve the value of this evolving approach to reduce the knowledge translation losses that exist between published research and clinical practice.

Emergency Department Communication in Persons Living With Dementia and Care Partners: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

To synthesize published research exploring emergency department (ED) communication strategies and decision-making with persons living with dementia (PLWD) and their care partners as the basis for a multistakeholder consensus conference to prioritize future research.

DESIGN

Systematic scoping review.

SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS

PLWD and their care partners in the ED setting.

METHODS

Informed by 2 Patient-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome (PICO) questions, we conducted systematic electronic searches of medical research databases for relevant publications following standardized methodological guidelines. The results were presented to interdisciplinary stakeholders, including dementia researchers, clinicians, PLWD, care partners, and advocacy organizations. The PICO questions included: How does communication differ for PLWD compared with persons without dementia? Are there specific communication strategies that improve the outcomes of ED care? Future research areas were prioritized.

RESULTS

From 5451 studies identified for PICO-1, 21 were abstracted. From 2687 studies identified for PICO-2, 3 were abstracted. None of the included studies directly evaluated communication differences between PLWD and other populations, nor the effectiveness of specific communication strategies. General themes emerging from the scoping review included perceptions by PLWD/care partners of rushed ED communication, often exacerbated by inconsistent messages between providers. Care partners consistently reported limited engagement in medical decision-making. In order, the research priorities identified included: (1) Barriers/facilitators of effective communication; (2) valid outcome measures of effective communication; (3) best practices for care partner engagement; (4) defining how individual-, provider-, and system-level factors influence communication; and (5) understanding how each member of ED team can ensure high-quality communication.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Research exploring ED communication with PLWD is sparse and does not directly evaluate specific communication strategies. Defining barriers and facilitators of effective communication was the highest-ranked research priority, followed by validating outcome measures associated with improved information exchange.

Geriatric emergency medicine-a model for frailty friendly healthcare

As the world's population continues to age over the decades ahead, medical educators and researchers in every adult medical and surgical specialty will need to 'geriatricise' their clinical science. Many have already engaged with geriatrics. Here we describe the progress that has been made and the opportunities ahead in the field of Geriatric Emergency Medicine (GEM), a field that has taken large steps in integrating holistic care. Future opportunities exist in the three domains of evidence-based medicine: including patient preferences and needs, generating scientific evidence, and improving physician knowledge and expertise. Implementation requires new innovations also in the organisation of care. Similar strategies may be useful in other fields of medicine, in making holistic care the standard for older people.

An implementation science approach to geriatric screening in an emergency department

BACKGROUND

The Geriatric Emergency Department (ED) Guidelines recommend screening older adults during their ED visit for delirium, fall risk/safe mobility, and home safety needs. We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and the Expert Recommendations for Implementation Change (ERIC) tool for preimplementation planning.

METHODS

The cross-sectional survey was conducted among ED nurses at an academic medical center. The survey was adapted from the CFIR Interview Guide Tool and consisted of 21 Likert scale questions based on four CFIR domains. Potential barriers identified by the survey were mapped to identify recommended implementation strategies using ERIC.

RESULTS

Forty-six of 160 potential participants (29%) responded. Intervention Characteristics: Nurses felt geriatric screening should be standard practice for all EDs (76.1% agreed some/very much) and that there was good evidence (67.4% agreed some/very much). Outer setting: The national and regional practices such as the existence of guidelines or similar practices in other hospitals were unknown to many (20.0%). Nurses did agree some/very much (64.4%) that the intervention was good for the hospital/health system. Inner Setting: 67.4% felt more staff or infrastructure and 63.0% felt more equipment were needed for the intervention. When asked to pick from a list of potential barriers, the most commonly chosen were motivational (I often do not remember (n = 27, 58.7%) and It is not a priority (n = 14, 30.4%)). The identified barriers were mapped using the ERIC tool to rate potential implementation strategies. Strategies to target culture change were identifying champions, improve adaptability, facilitate the nurses performing the intervention, and increase demand for the intervention.

CONCLUSION

CFIR domains and ERIC tools are applicable to an ED intervention for older adults. This preimplementation process could be replicated in other EDs considering implementing geriatric screening.

Quality improvement studies in nursing homes: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Quality improvement (QI) is used in nursing homes (NH) to implement and sustain improvements in patient outcomes. Little is known about how QI strategies are used in NHs. This lack of information is a barrier to replicating successful strategies. Guided by the Framework for Implementation Research, the purpose of this study was to map-out the use, evaluation, and reporting of QI strategies in NHs.

METHODS

This scoping review was completed to identify reports published between July 2003 through February 2019. Two reviewers screened articles and included those with (1) the term "quality improvement" to describe their methods, or reported use of a QI model (e.g., Six Sigma) or strategy (e.g., process mapping) (2), findings related to impact on service and/or resident outcomes, and (3) two or more NHs included. Reviewers extracted data on study design, setting, population, problem, solution to address problem, QI strategies, and outcomes (implementation, service, and resident). Vote counting and narrative synthesis were used to describe the use of QI strategies, implementation outcomes, and service and/or resident outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 2302 articles identified, the full text of 77 articles reporting on 59 studies were included. Studies focused on 23 clinical problems, most commonly pressure ulcers, falls, and pain. Studies used an average of 6 to 7 QI strategies. The rate that strategies were used varied substantially, e.g., the rate of in-person training (55%) was more than twice the rate of plan-do-study-act cycles (20%). On average, studies assessed two implementation outcomes; the rate these outcomes were used varied widely, with 37% reporting on staff perceptions (e.g., feasibility) of solutions or QI strategies vs. 8% reporting on fidelity and sustainment. Most studies (n = 49) reported service outcomes and over half (n = 34) reported resident outcomes. In studies with statistical tests of improvement, service outcomes improved more often than resident outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This study maps-out the scope of published, peer-reviewed studies of QI in NHs. The findings suggest preliminary guidance for future studies designed to promote the replication and synthesis of promising solutions. The findings also suggest strategies to refine procedures for more effective improvement work in NHs.

Developing and implementing an interventional bundle to reduce mortality from gastroschisis in low-resource settings

Background: Gastroschisis is associated with less than 4% mortality in high-income countries and over 90% mortality in many tertiary paediatric surgery centres across sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). The aim of this trial is to develop, implement and prospectively evaluate an interventional bundle to reduce mortality from gastroschisis in seven tertiary paediatric surgery centres across SSA. Methods: A hybrid type-2 effectiveness-implementation, pre-post study design will be utilised. Using current literature an evidence-based, low-technology interventional bundle has been developed. A systematic review, qualitative study and Delphi process will provide further evidence to optimise the interventional bundle and implementation strategy. The interventional bundle has core components, which will remain consistent across all sites, and adaptable components, which will be determined through in-country co-development meetings. Pre- and post-intervention data will be collected on clinical, service delivery and implementation outcomes for 2-years at each site. The primary clinical outcome will be all-cause, in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes include the occurrence of a major complication, length of hospital stay and time to full enteral feeds. Service delivery outcomes include time to hospital and primary intervention, and adherence to the pre-hospital and in-hospital protocols.  Implementation outcomes are acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity, coverage, cost and sustainability. Pre- and post-intervention clinical outcomes will be compared using Chi-squared analysis, unpaired t-test and/or Mann-Whitney U test. Time-series analysis will be undertaken using Statistical Process Control to identify significant trends and shifts in outcome overtime. Multivariate logistic regression analysis will be used to identify clinical and implementation factors affecting outcome with adjustment for confounders. Outcome: This will be the first multi-centre interventional study to our knowledge aimed at reducing mortality from gastroschisis in low-resource settings. If successful, detailed evaluation of both the clinical and implementation components of the study will allow sustainability in the study sites and further scale-up. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03724214.