A quality improvement project to reduce postoperative adverse respiratory events and increase safety in the postanesthesia care unit of a pediatric institution

Reducing postoperative hypothermia in infants: Quality improvement in China

BACKGROUND

Unintended postoperative hypothermia in infants is associated with increased mortality and morbidity. We noted consistent hypothermia postoperatively in more than 60% of our neonatal intensive care (NICU) babies. Therefore, we set out to determine whether a targeted quality improvement (QI) project could decrease postoperative hypothermia rates in infants.

OBJECTIVES

Our SMART aim was to reduce postoperative hypothermia (<36.5°C) in infants from 60% to 40% within 6 months.

METHODS

This project was approved by IRB at Guangzhou Women and Children's Medical Center, China. The QI team included multidisciplinary healthcare providers in China and QI experts from Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, USA. The plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles included establishing a perioperative-thermoregulation protocol, optimizing the transfer process, and staff education. The primary outcome and balancing measures were, respectively, postoperative hypothermia and hyperthermia (axillary temperature < 36.5°C, >37.5°C). Data collected was analyzed using control charts. The factors associated with a reduction in hypothermia were explored using regression analysis.

RESULTS

There were 295 infants in the project. The percentage of postoperative hypothermia decreased from 60% to 37% over 26 weeks, a special cause variation below the mean on the statistical process control chart. Reduction in hypothermia was associated with an odds of 0.17 (95% CI: 0.06-0.46; p <.001) for compliance with the transport incubator and 0.24 (95% CI: 0.1-0.58; p =.002) for prewarming the OR ambient temperature to 26°C. Two infants had hyperthermia.

CONCLUSIONS

Our QI project reduced postoperative hypothermia without incurring hyperthermia through multidisciplinary team collaboration with the guidance of QI experts from the USA.

Anesthesiology Patient Handoff Education Interventions: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Anesthesiology provider handoffs are complex, occur frequently, and have been associated with adverse patient outcomes. The authors sought to determine the degree to which anesthesiology handoff studies with educational interventions incorporated tenets of educational best practices.

METHODS

The research team conducted a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature focused on handoff studies with education interventions that included anesthesiology providers. Searches were conducted using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and ERIC (2010-September 2021). Each phase of the article review process included at least two trained independent reviewers. In addition, pairs of trained reviewers abstracted study characteristics RESULTS: Twenty-six articles met inclusion criteria. Two thirds (18/26; 69.2%) were published after 2017, and almost three fourths (19/26; 73.1%) included learners. Education intervention descriptions varied, with only 15.4% (4/26) briefly mentioning education theory, 7.7% (2/26) with clear education objectives, and 7.7% (2/26) assessing curriculum via participant satisfaction. Most (22/26; 84.6%) assessed Kirkpatrick's level 3 (handoff behavior change), and 26.9% (7/26) assessed level 4b (patient outcomes). Medical education quality scores were low (range 6-24, mean 11.3; max 32), with more than half (15/26; 57.7%) receiving scores ≤ 10.

CONCLUSION

Educational interventions demonstrate marked heterogeneity in the use of educational theoretical concepts and established curriculum development best practices. Future studies should report on important aspects of educational interventions, which would allow for comparison across studies, yield the essential data needed to identify handoff education best practices, and improve patient safety.

How the Wake Up Safe pediatric anesthesia collaborative increased quality improvement capability and collaboration

Wake Up Safe is a patient safety organization consisting of 40 institutions with a mission to improve the processes of care and outcomes for newborns, infants, and children having anesthesia for surgery and medical procedures. It was recognized that the level of quality improvement (QI), knowledge, and experience varied greatly between member institutions. In Fiscal Year 2015, the group's leadership created a subcommittee on QI and education in efforts to provide member institutions with the skills and resources to use QI methodology to improve care at their own institution. This subcommittee developed a program to improve members' knowledge in safety analytics and QI science and to help members implement change in their own institutions. This review describes the development and implementation of this initiative. As a result of this initiative, significant progress was made improving the QI capability of the collaborative over a two-year period. This educational and support program included workshops, an online discussion forum, site visits, and project presentations.

Quality improvement and patient safety in China, present and future

With continued political support and increased health financing, China has achieved great progress in medical and health quality during the two decades. The strategy to improve health in China is built on reliable cross-sectoral information and data sharing along with quality improvement science and safety analytics balancing equitability, accessibility, quality outcomes, and safety in healthcare for everyone. As part of the healthcare system, pediatric anesthesiology has made great efforts to align with the China healthcare strategy to achieve quality outcomes, accessibility, and patient safety, but it still faces many problems such as unbalanced regional development, lack of awareness and relevant knowledge, and increased workload due to insufficient number of anesthesiologists. To address these problems, the Chinese Society of Anesthesiology and Chinese Society for Pediatric Anesthesiology supported by the Chinese hospital associations are strengthening interregional cooperation and international collaboration. In our experience, quality improvement can be successfully implemented at major centers through collaboration with experienced international institutions. In turn, the major centers educate and collaborate with the district hospitals to empower local improvements in safety and quality. Since the science in QI and patient safety is relatively new to anesthesiology in China, such collaborations must be greatly scaled up to reach the large geography and patient population in China. While the future is promising, there is still a long way to go.

Does standardisation improve post-operative anaesthesia handoffs? Meta-analyses on provider, patient, organisational, and handoff outcomes

Anaesthesia handoffs are associated with negative outcomes (e.g. inappropriate treatments, post-operative complications, and in-hospital mortality). To minimise these adverse outcomes, federal bodies (e.g. Joint Commission) have mandated handoff standardisation. Due to the proliferation of handoff interventions and research, there is a need to meta-analyze anaesthesia handoffs. Therefore, we performed meta-analyses on the provider, patient, organisational, and handoff outcomes related to post-operative anaesthesia handoff protocols. We meta-analysed 41 articles with post-operative anaesthesia handoffs that implemented a standardised handoff protocol. Compared to no standardisation, a standardised post-operative anaesthesia handoff changed provider outcomes with an OR of 4.03 (95% CI 3.20-5.08), patient outcomes with an OR of 1.49 (95% CI 1.32-1.69), organisational outcomes with an OR of 4.25 (95% CI 2.51-7.19), handoff outcomes with an OR of 8.52 (95% CI 7.05-10.31). Our meta-analyses demonstrate that standardised post-operative anaesthesia handoffs altered patient, provider, organisational, and handoff outcomes. Practitioner Summary: We conducted meta-analyses to assess the effects of post-operative anaesthesia handoff standardisation on provider, patient, organisational, and handoff outcomes. Our findings suggest that standardised post-operative anaesthesia handoffs changed all listed outcomes in a positive direction. We discuss the implications of these findings as well as notable limitations in this literature base.

Risk assessment and optimization strategies to reduce perioperative respiratory adverse events in Pediatric Anesthesia-Part 2: Anesthesia-related risk and treatment options

Perioperative respiratory adverse events are the most common cause of critical events in children undergoing anesthesia and surgery. While many risk factors remain unmodifiable, there are numerous anesthetic management decisions which can impact the incidence and impact of these events, especially in at-risk children. Ongoing research continues to improve our understanding of both the influence of risk factors and the effect of specific interventions. This review discusses anesthesia risk factors and outlines strategies to reduce the rate and impact of perioperative respiratory adverse events with a chronologic based inquiry into anesthetic management decisions through the perioperative period from premedication to postoperative disposition.

Factors Influencing the Implementation of Foreign Innovations in Organization and Management of Health Service Delivery in China: A Systematic Review

Background: China has been encouraged to learn from international innovations in the organization and management of health service delivery to achieve the national health reform objectives. However, the success and effectiveness of implementing innovations is affected by the interactions of innovations with the Chinese context. Our aim is to synthesize evidence on factors influencing the implementation of non-Chinese innovations in organization and management of health service delivery in mainland China. Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched seven databases for peer-reviewed articles published between 2009 and 2020. Data were analyzed and combined to generate a list of factors influencing the implementation of foreign innovations in China. The factors were classified in the categories context, system, organization, innovation, users, resources, and implementation process. Results: The 110 studies meeting the inclusion criteria revealed 33 factors. Most supported by evidence is the factor integration in organizational policies, followed by the factors motivation & incentives and human resources. Some factors (e.g., governmental policies & regulations) were mentioned in multiple studies with little or no evidence. Conclusion: Evidence on factors influencing the implementation of foreign innovations in organization and management of health service delivery is scarce and of limited quality. Although many factors identified in this review have also been reported in reviews primarily considering Western literature, this review suggests that extrinsic motivation, financial incentives, governmental and organizational policies & regulations are more important while decentralization was found to be less important in China compare to Western countries. In addition, introducing innovations in rural China seems more challenging than in urban China, because of a lack of human resources and the more traditional rural culture.

What Do We Know About Teamwork in Chinese Hospitals? A Systematic Review

Background and Objective: Improving quality of care is one of the primary goals in current Chinese hospital reforms. Teamwork can play an essential role. Characteristics of teamwork and interventions for improving teamwork in hospitals have been widely studied. However, most of these studies are from a Western context; evidence from China is scarce. Because of the contextual differences between China and Western countries, empirical evidence on teamwork from Western hospitals may have limited validity in China. This systematic review aims to advance the evidence base and understanding of teamwork in Chinese hospitals. Methods: Both English (i.e., Embase, Medline, and Web of Science) and Chinese databases (i.e., CNKI, CQVIP, and Wanfang) were searched for relevant articles until February 6, 2020. We included the studies that empirically researched teamwork in Chinese hospitals. Studies were excluded if they (1) were not conducted in hospitals in Mainland China, (2) did not research teamwork on team interventions, (3) were not empirical, (4) were not written in English or Chinese, (5) were not published in peer-reviewed journals, and (6) were not conducted in teams that provide direct patient care. Both deductive and inductive approaches were used to analyze data. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used to assess their methodological quality. Results: A total of 70 articles (i.e., 39 English articles and 31 Chinese articles) were included. The results are presented in two main categories: Teamwork components and Team interventions. The evidence regarding the relationships among inputs, processes, and outcomes is scarce and mostly inconclusive. The only conclusive evidence shows that females perceive better team processes than males. Similar types of training and tools were introduced as can be found in Western literature, all showing positive effects. In line with the Chinese health reforms, many of the intervention studies regard the introduction of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs). The evidence on the implementation of MDTs reveals that they have led to lower complication rates, shorter hospital stays, higher diagnosis accuracy, efficiency improvement, and a variety of better disease-specific clinical outcomes. Evidence on the effect on patient survival is inconclusive. Conclusion: The Chinese studies on teamwork components mainly focus on the input-process relationship. The evidence provided on this relationship is, however, mostly inconclusive. The intervention studies in Chinese hospitals predominantly focus on patient outcomes rather than organizational and employee outcomes. The introduction of training, tools, and MDTs generally shows promising results. The evidence from primary hospitals and rural areas, which are prioritized in the health reforms, is especially scarce. Advancing the evidence base on teamwork, especially in primary hospitals and rural areas, is needed and can inform policy and management to promote the health reform implementation. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020175069, identifier CRD42020175069.

Best practice & research clinical anesthesiology: Safety and quality in perioperative anesthesia care. Update on safety in pediatric anesthesia

Pediatric anesthesia is large part of anesthesia clinical practice. Children, parents and anesthesiologists fear anesthesia because of the risk of acute morbidity and mortality. Modern anesthesia in otherwise healthy children above 1 year of age in developed countries has become very safe due to recent advance in pharmacology, intensive education, and training as well as centralization of care. In contrast, anesthesia in these children in low-income countries is associated with a high risk of mortality due to lack of basic resources and adequate training of health care providers. Anesthesia for neonates and toddlers is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Anesthesia-related (near) critical incidents occur in 5% of anesthetic procedures and are largely dependent on the skills and up-to-date knowledge of the whole perioperative team in the specific needs for children. An investment in continuous medical education of the perioperative staff is required and international standard operating protocols for common procedures and critical situations should be defined.