Prompting physicians to address a daily checklist and process of care and clinical outcomes: a single-site study

Conceptualizations of interprofessional communication in intensive care units: findings from a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Clinical errors in intensive care units (ICUs) are consistently attributed to communication errors. Despite its importance for patient safety and quality in critical care settings, few studies consider interprofessional communication as more than the basic exchange of information.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of interprofessional communication in ICUs to (1) characterize how communication is defined and measured and (2) identify contributions the field of health communication can make to team communication in ICUs. Through a series of queries in PubMed and Communication and Mass Media Complete databases, we identified and compared persistent gaps in how communication is framed and theorized in 28 publications from health services and 6 from social science outlets. We identified research priorities and suggested strategies for discussing communication more holistically in future health services research.

RESULTS

34 articles published from 1999 to 2021 were included. Six explicitly defined communication. Six were published in social science journals, but none were authored by a communication studies scholar. Half of the articles addressed communication as a transaction focused on information transfer, and the other half addressed communication as a process.

CONCLUSIONS

Methodological implications are identified with the intent to encourage future interdisciplinary collaboration for studying communication in ICUs. We discuss the importance of (1) using language to describe communication that facilitates interdisciplinary engagement, (2) prioritizing communication as a process and using qualitative methods to provide insight, and (3) engaging health communication theories and experts to assist in developing more fruitful research questions and designs.

Assessing the impact of real-time random safety audits through full propensity score matching on reliable data from the clinical information system

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based care processes are not always applied at the bedside in critically ill patients. Numerous studies have assessed the impact of checklists and related strategies on the process of care and patient outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the effects of real-time random safety audits on process-of-care and outcome variables in critical care patients.

METHODS

This prospective study used data from the clinical information system to evaluate the impact of real-time random safety audits targeting 32 safety measures in two intensive care units during a 9-month period. We compared endpoints between patients attended with safety audits and those not attended with safety audits. The primary endpoint was mortality, measured by Cox hazard regression after full propensity-score matching. Secondary endpoints were the impact on adherence to process-of-care measures and on quality indicators.

RESULTS

We included 871 patients; 228 of these were attended in ≥ 1 real-time random safety audits. Safety audits were carried out on 390 patient-days; most improvements in the process of care were observed in safety measures related to mechanical ventilation, renal function and therapies, nutrition, and clinical information system. Although the group of patients attended in safety audits had more severe disease at ICU admission [APACHE II score 21 (16-27) vs. 20 (15-25), p = 0.023]; included a higher proportion of surgical patients [37.3 % vs. 26.4 %, p = 0.003] and a higher proportion of mechanically ventilated patients [72.8 % vs. 40.3 %, p < 0.001]; averaged more days on mechanical ventilation, central venous catheter, and urinary catheter; and had a longer ICU stay [12.5 (5.5-23.3) vs. 2.9 (1.7-5.9), p < 0.001], ICU mortality did not differ significantly between groups (19.3 % vs. 18.8 % in the group without safety rounds). After full propensity-score matching, Cox hazard regression analysis showed real-time random safety audits were associated with a lower risk of mortality throughout the ICU stay (HR 0.31; 95 %CI 0.20-0.47).

CONCLUSIONS

Real-time random safety audits are associated with a reduction in the risk of ICU mortality. Exploiting data from the clinical information system is useful in assessing the impact of them on the care process, quality indicators, and mortality.

A voice-based digital assistant for intelligent prompting of evidence-based practices during ICU rounds

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the technical feasibility and potential value of a digital assistant that prompts intensive care unit (ICU) rounding teams to use evidence-based practices based on analysis of their real-time discussions.

METHODS

We evaluated a novel voice-based digital assistant which audio records and processes the ICU care team's rounding discussions to determine which evidence-based practices are applicable to the patient but have yet to be addressed by the team. The system would then prompt the team to consider indicated but not yet delivered practices, thereby reducing cognitive burden compared to traditional rigid rounding checklists. In a retrospective analysis, we applied automatic transcription, natural language processing, and a rule-based expert system to generate personalized prompts for each patient in 106 audio-recorded ICU rounding discussions. To assess technical feasibility, we compared the system's prompts to those created by experienced critical care nurses who directly observed rounds. To assess potential value, we also compared the system's prompts to a hypothetical paper checklist containing all evidence-based practices.

RESULTS

The positive predictive value, negative predictive value, true positive rate, and true negative rate of the system's prompts were 0.45 ± 0.06, 0.83 ± 0.04, 0.68 ± 0.07, and 0.66 ± 0.04, respectively. If implemented in lieu of a paper checklist, the system would generate 56% fewer prompts per patient, with 50%±17% greater precision.

CONCLUSION

A voice-based digital assistant can reduce prompts per patient compared to traditional approaches for improving evidence uptake on ICU rounds. Additional work is needed to evaluate field performance and team acceptance.

Improving Thoracic Surgery Ward Round Quality and Enhancing Patient Safety in a Referral Centre

Introduction Ward rounds are vital clinical processes that facilitate an opportunity for daily review and management of thoracic surgery inpatients. The aim of this study was to compare thoracic surgery ward round documentation against locally agreed standards and design a template to improve the detail and uniformity of this process to enhance patient care. Materials and methods Data for this audit was collected retrospectively and prospectively. Data was collected during three auditing periods and managed on Microsoft Excel. Descriptive statistics were used for its analysis. Chi-square and Fisher's Exact tests were used to test for differences in reporting rates. Results and discussion Initially, a total of 199 ward round notes were reviewed. Imaging results (19%) and discharge planning (23%) were not reported. eCARE (electronic Clinical Assessment for Round Evaluation) was developed to ensure that all aspects of patient evaluation recommended by the guidelines were included. Reporting rates significantly improved after such changes. We analysed the effect of the new ward round note on discharge planning (23.3 vs 41%, p<0.001), complication rates (32.6 vs 21.9%, p=0.03), post-surgical length of stay (LOS) (7.0 vs 5.0, p<0.001). Conclusion Over a year, we audited the Thoracic Surgery Department's ward round documentation against locally agreed standards in line with national recommendations. Several important items were not regularly reported. Using closed-ended questions improved reporting rates, and patient care was optimised. Further research should explore the impact of this new documentation method on patient care and postoperative outcomes in our Trust as well as other cardiothoracic centres.

Management of Complex Infections in Hemophagocytic Lymphohistiocytosis in Adults

Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) is a syndrome of excessive immune system activation and inflammatory response due to a variety of primary and secondary factors that can cause a range of clinical symptoms and, in severe cases, life-threatening conditions. Patients with HLH are at increased risk of infection due to their abnormal immune function as well as chemotherapy and immunosuppressive therapy at the time of treatment. At the same time, the lack of specific clinical features makes complex infections in HLH challenging to diagnose and treat. The management of complex infections in HLH requires a multidisciplinary and integrated approach including the early identification of pathogens, the development of anti-infection protocols and regimens, and the elimination of potential infection factors. Especially in HLH patients with septic shock, empirical combination therapy against the most likely pathogens should be initiated, and appropriate anti-infective regimens should be determined based on immune status, site of infection, pathogens, and their drug resistance, with timely antibiotic adjustment by monitoring procalcitonin. In addition, anti-infection prophylaxis for HLH patients is needed to reduce the risk of infection such as prophylactic antibiotics and vaccinations. In conclusion, complex infection in HLH is a serious and challenging disease that requires vigilance, early identification, and timely anti-infective therapy.

Development of a quality indicator set to measure and improve quality of ICU care in low- and middle-income countries

PURPOSE

To develop a set of actionable quality indicators for critical care suitable for use in low- or middle-income countries (LMICs).

METHODS

A list of 84 candidate indicators compiled from a previous literature review and stakeholder recommendations were categorised into three domains (foundation, process, and quality impact). An expert panel (EP) representing stakeholders from critical care and allied specialties in multiple low-, middle-, and high-income countries was convened. In rounds one and two of the Delphi exercise, the EP appraised (Likert scale 1-5) each indicator for validity, feasibility; in round three sensitivity to change, and reliability were additionally appraised. Potential barriers and facilitators to implementation of the quality indicators were also reported in this round. Median score and interquartile range (IQR) were used to determine consensus; indicators with consensus disagreement (median < 4, IQR ≤ 1) were removed, and indicators with consensus agreement (median ≥ 4, IQR ≤ 1) or no consensus were retained. In round four, indicators were prioritised based on their ability to impact cost of care to the provider and recipient, staff well-being, patient safety, and patient-centred outcomes.

RESULTS

Seventy-one experts from 30 countries (n = 45, 63%, representing critical care) selected 57 indicators to assess quality of care in intensive care unit (ICU) in LMICs: 16 foundation, 27 process, and 14 quality impact indicators after round three. Round 4 resulted in 14 prioritised indicators. Fifty-seven respondents reported barriers and facilitators, of which electronic registry-embedded data collection was the biggest perceived facilitator to implementation (n = 54/57, 95%) Concerns over burden of data collection (n = 53/57, 93%) and variations in definition (n = 45/57, 79%) were perceived as the greatest barrier to implementation.

CONCLUSION

This consensus exercise provides a common set of indicators to support benchmarking and quality improvement programs for critical care populations in LMICs.

Antimicrobial stewardship for sepsis in the intensive care unit: Survey of critical care and infectious diseases physicians

Objective:

To evaluate the attitudes of infectious diseases (ID) and critical care physicians toward antimicrobial stewardship in the intensive care unit (ICU).

Design:

Anonymous, cross-sectional, web-based surveys.

Setting:

Surveys were completed in March–November 2017, and data were analyzed from December 2017 to December 2019.

Participants:

ID and critical care fellows and attending physicians.

Methods:

We included 10 demographic and 17 newly developed, 5-point, Likert-scaled items measuring attitudes toward ICU antimicrobial stewardship and transdisciplinary collaboration. Exploratory principal components analysis (PCA) was used for data reduction. Multivariable linear regression models explored demographic and attitudinal variables.

Results:

Of 372 respondents, 315 physicians had complete data (72% attendings, 28% fellows; 63% ID specialists, and 37% critical care specialists). Our PCA yielded a 3-item factor measuring which specialty should assume ICU antimicrobial stewardship (Cronbach standardized α = 0.71; higher scores indicate that ID physicians should be stewards), and a 4-item factor measuring value of ICU transdisciplinary collaborations (α = 0.62; higher scores indicate higher value). In regression models, ID physicians (vs critical care physicians), placed higher value on ICU collaborations and expressed discomfort with uncertain diagnoses. These factors were independently associated with stronger agreement that ID physicians should be ICU antimicrobial stewards. The following factors were independently associated with higher value of transdisciplinary collaboration: female sex, less discomfort with uncertain diagnoses, and stronger agreement with ID physicians as ICU antimicrobial stewards.

Conclusions:

ID and critical care physicians endorsed their own group for antimicrobial stewardship, but both groups placed high value on ICU transdisciplinary collaborations. Physicians who were more uncomfortable with uncertain diagnoses reported preference for ID physicians to coordinate ICU antimicrobial stewardship; however, physicians who were less uncomfortable with uncertain diagnoses placed greater value on ICU collaborations.

Informing the standardising of care for prolonged stay patients in the ICU: A scoping review of quality improvement tools

OBJECTIVES

To inform design of quality improvement (QI) tools specific to patients with prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) stay, we determined characteristics (format/content), development, implementation, and outcomes of published multi-component QI tools used in ICU irrespective of length of stay.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Scoping review searching electronic databases, trial registries and grey literature (January 2000 to January 2022).

RESULTS

We screened 58,378 citations, identifying 96 studies. All tools were designed for use commencing at ICU admission except 3 tools implemented at 3, 5 or 14 days. We identified 32 studies of locally developed checklists, 28 goal setting/structured communication templates, 23 care bundles, and 9 studies of mixed format tools. Most (43 %) tools were designed for use during rounds, fewer tools were designed for use throughout the ICU day (27 %) or stay (9 %). Most studies (55 %) reported process objectives i.e., improving communication, care standardisation, or rounding efficiency. Most common clinical processes QI tools were used to standardise were sedation (62, 65 %), ventilation and weaning (55, 57 %), and analgesia management (58, 60 %). 44 studies reported the effect of the tool on patient outcomes. Of these, only two identified a negative effect - increased ICU length of stay and increased ICU days with pain and delirium.

CONCLUSION

Although we identified numerous QI tools for use in ICU settings, few were designed to specifically address actionable processes of care relevant to the unique needs of prolonged ICU stay patients. Tools that address these needs are urgently required.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

The review protocol is registered on the Open Science Framework, https://osf.io/, DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/Z8MRE.

Timing of vasoactive agents and corticosteroid initiation in septic shock

Septic shock remains a health care concern associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock recommend early fluid resuscitation and antimicrobials. Beyond initial management, the guidelines do not provide clear recommendations on appropriate time to initiate vasoactive therapies and corticosteroids in patients who develop shock. This review summarizes the literature regarding time of initiation of these interventions. Clinical data regarding time of initiation of these therapies in relation to shock onset, sequence of treatments with regard to each other, and clinical markers evaluated to guide initiation are summarized. Early-high vasopressor initiation within first 6 h of shock onset is associated with lower mortality. Following norepinephrine initiation, the exact dose and timing of escalation to adjunctive vasopressor agents are not well elucidated in the literature. However, recent data indicate that timing may be an important factor in initiating vasopressors and adjunctive therapies, such as corticosteroids. Norepinephrine-equivalent dose and lactate concentration can aid in determining when to initiate vasopressin and angiotensin II in patients with septic shock. Future guidelines with clear recommendations on the time of initiation of septic shock therapies are warranted.

Systematic Evaluation of the Effect of Bedside Ward Round Checklist on Clinical Outcomes of Critical Patients

Objective

To systematically evaluate the effect of bedside ward round checklists on the clinical outcomes of critical patients and thus provide a scientific and rational basis for decision-making in its clinical application.

Methods

PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wanfang databases were searched to collect the literature studies about randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies involving the effect of bedside ward round checklists on the clinical outcomes of critical patients, and the retrieval time limit was from the establishment of the database to August 2019. After two researchers independently screened the literature studies, extracted the literature data, and evaluated the risk of bias in included studies, meta-analysis was carried out by using Stata 12.0 software.

Results

Two RCTs and nine cohort studies were included in this study. The results of meta-analysis showed that compared with the ordinary bedside ward round, the application of checklist in bedside ward round could shorten the ICU hospitalization time (standardized mean difference (SMD) = - 0.37, 95% CI (- 0.78, 0.04), P ≤ 0.001) and mechanical ventilation time (SMD = - 0.24, 95% CI (- 0.44, -0.04), P = 0.037) and reduce the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) (SMD = 0.61, 95% CI (0.38, 0.99), P = 0.057) in critical patients. However, there were no significant differences in central venous catheter (CVC) retention time and incidence and mortality of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) between ordinary ward round and bedside ward round checklist.

Conclusion

The existing evidence shows that compared with the ordinary ward round, the application of bedside ward round checklists can shorten ICU hospitalization time and mechanical ventilation time and reduce VAP incidence and ICU mortality in critical patients. However, due to the limitations of the quality of the included studies, the above conclusions need to be verified with more high-quality studies.

Intensive care unit rounding checklists to reduce catheter-associated urinary tract infections

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether the implementation of an intensive care unit (ICU) rounding checklist reduces the number of catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs).

DESIGN

Retrospective before-and-after study that took place between March 2013 and February 2017.

SETTING

An academic community hospital 16-bed, mixed surgical, cardiac, medical ICU.

PATIENTS

Participants were all patients admitted to the adult mixed ICU and had a diagnosis of CAUTI.

INTERVENTION

Initiation of an ICU rounding checklist that prompts physicians to address any use of urinary catheters with analysis comparing the preintervention period before roll out of the rounding checklist versus the postintervention periods.

RESULTS

There were 19 CAUTIs and 9,288 urinary catheter days (2.04 CAUTIs per 1,000 catheter days). The catheter utilization ratio increased in the first year after the intervention (0.67 vs 0.60; P = .0079), then decreased in the second year after the intervention (0.53 vs 0.60; P = .0992) and in the third year after the intervention (0.53 vs 0.60; P = .0224). The rate of CAUTI (ie, CAUTI per 1,000 urinary catheter days) decreased from 4.62 before the checklist was implemented to 2.12 in the first year after the intervention (P = .2104). The CAUTI rate was 0.45 in the second year (P = .0275) and 0.96 in the third year (P = .0532).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that utilization of a daily rounding checklist is associated with a decrease in the rates of CAUTI in ICU patients. Incorporating a rounding checklist is feasible in the ICU.

Promoting Evidence-Based Practice in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Systematic Review

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

OBJECTIVE:

Low tidal volume ventilation and prone positioning are recommended therapies yet underused in acute respiratory distress syndrome. We aimed to assess the role of interventions focused on implementation of low tidal volume ventilation and prone positioning in mechanically ventilated adult patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome.

DATA SOURCES:

PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.

STUDY SELECTION:

We searched the four databases from January 1, 2001, to January 28, 2021, for studies that met the predefined search criteria. Selected studies focused on interventions to improve implementation of low tidal volume ventilation and prone positioning in mechanically ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome.

DATA EXTRACTION:

Two authors independently performed study selection and data extraction using a standardized form.

DATA SYNTHESIS:

Due to methodological heterogeneity of included studies, meta-analysis was not feasible; thus, we provided a narrative summary and assessment of the literature. Eight nonrandomized studies met our eligibility criteria. Most studies looked at interventions to improve adherence to low tidal volume ventilation. Most interventions focused on education for providers. Studies were primarily conducted in the ICU and involved trainees, intensivists, respiratory therapists, and critical care nurses. Although overall quality of the studies was very low, the primary outcomes of interest suggest that interventions could improve adherence to or implementation of low tidal volume ventilation and prone positioning in acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Measurements and Main Results:

Two authors independently performed study selection and data extraction using a standardized form. Due to methodologic heterogeneity of included studies, meta-analysis was not feasible; thus, we provided a narrative summary and assessment of the literature. Eight nonrandomized studies met our eligibility criteria. Most studies looked at interventions to improve adherence to low tidal volume ventilation. Most interventions focused on education for providers. Studies were primarily conducted in the ICU and involved trainees, intensivists, respiratory therapists, and critical care nurses. Although overall quality of the studies was very low, the primary outcomes of interest suggest that interventions could improve adherence to or implementation of low tidal volume ventilation and prone positioning in acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Conclusions:

There is a dearth of literature addressing interventions to improve implementation of evidence-based practices in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Existing interventions to improve clinician knowledge and facilitate application of low tidal volume ventilation and prone positioning may be effective, but supporting studies have significant limitations.

Antibiotic Stewardship in the Intensive Care Unit. An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report in Collaboration with the AACN, CHEST, CDC, and SCCM

Intensive care units (ICUs) are an appropriate focus of antibiotic stewardship program efforts because a large proportion of any hospital’s use of parenteral antibiotics, especially broad-spectrum, occurs in the ICU. Given the importance of antibiotic stewardship for critically ill patients and the importance of critical care practitioners as the front line for antibiotic stewardship, a workshop was convened to specifically address barriers to antibiotic stewardship in the ICU and discuss tactics to overcome these. The working definition of antibiotic stewardship is “the right drug at the right time and the right dose for the right bug for the right duration.” A major emphasis was that antibiotic stewardship should be a core competency of critical care clinicians. Fear of pathogens that are not covered by empirical antibiotics is a major driver of excessively broad-spectrum therapy in critically ill patients. Better diagnostics and outcome data can address this fear and expand efforts to narrow or shorten therapy. Greater awareness of the substantial adverse effects of antibiotics should be emphasized and is an important counterargument to broad-spectrum therapy in individual low-risk patients. Optimal antibiotic stewardship should not focus solely on reducing antibiotic use or ensuring compliance with guidelines. Instead, it should enhance care both for individual patients (by improving and individualizing their choice of antibiotic) and for the ICU population as a whole. Opportunities for antibiotic stewardship in common ICU infections, including community- and hospital-acquired pneumonia and sepsis, are discussed. Intensivists can partner with antibiotic stewardship programs to address barriers and improve patient care.

Impact of Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness on Treatment of Critically Ill Septic Patients in a Low-Resource Medical Intensive Care Unit

Introduction: Treatment of sepsis and septic shock can be a challenge even for intensive care units (ICUs) in high income countries, but it is especially difficult for ICUs with limited resources. Aim: To evaluate the impact of CERTAIN on treatment of critically ill septic patients in low-resource medical ICU. Materials and Methods: In a before-and-after study design, we compared clinical outcomes, processes, and complications (hospital acquired infections) 1 year before and 2 years after (2016 and 2017) introduction of CERTAIN. Results: A total of 125 patients with sepsis were prospectively identified for a 3-year period. Mean patient age, gender distribution, number of patients on mechanical ventilation (33 [76.7%] vs. 42 [84%] vs. 24 [75%]) and vasopressor use (23 [53.5%] vs. 34 [68%] vs. 24 [75%]) were similar before (2015) and 2 years after (2016 and 2017) the implementation of CERTAIN. Severity of illness (Simplified Acute Physiology Score II [SAPS II score]) was higher after the implementation. The checklist was incorporated in the daily practice with 100% adherence to its use. The duration of mechanical ventilation (5.3 ± 5.3 vs. 4.2 ± 3.6 vs. 3.7 ± 5.5), antibiotic treatment (8.2 ± 5.4 vs. 6.9 ± 4.1 vs. 5.8 ± 5.6), central venous catheter use (6.2 ± 5.7 vs. 5.7 ± 4.6 vs. 4.2 ± 6.1), ICU stay (8.4 ± 5.4 vs. 7.1 ± 4.1 vs. 5.8 ± 5.6), and the incidence of nosocomial infection (33.3% vs. 30% vs. 12.5%) decreased in the period after the onset of the intervention, but the results did not reach statistical significance. When adjusted for baseline characteristics, CERTAIN was not associated with hospital mortality (odds ratio 0.88, 0.38-2.04). Conclusion: CERTAIN was readily adopted in the ICU workflow and was associated with improvement in treatment of critically ill patients with sepsis.

Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury: An Exploratory Multicenter International Quality-Improvement Study in the ICUs With Variable Resources

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

OBJECTIVES:

To determine whether the “Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury” decision support tool during ICU admission and rounding is associated with improvements in nonadherence to evidence-based daily care processes and outcomes in variably resourced ICUs.

DESIGN, SETTINGS, PATIENTS:

This before-after study was performed in 34 ICUs (15 countries) from 2013 to 2017. Data were collected for 3 months before and 6 months after Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury implementation.

INTERVENTIONS:

Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury implementation using remote simulation training.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:

The coprimary outcomes, modified from the original protocol before data analysis, were nonadherence to 10 basic care processes and ICU and hospital length of stay. There were 1,447 patients in the preimplementation phase and 2,809 patients in the postimplementation phase. After adjusting for center effect, Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury implementation was associated with reduced nonadherence to care processes (adjusted incidence rate ratio [95% CI]): deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis (0.74 [0.68–0.81), peptic ulcer prophylaxis (0.46 [0.38–0.57]), spontaneous breathing trial (0.81 [0.76–0.86]), family conferences (0.86 [0.81–0.92]), and daily assessment for the need of central venous catheters (0.85 [0.81–0.90]), urinary catheters (0.84 [0.80–0.88]), antimicrobials (0.66 [0.62–0.71]), and sedation (0.62 [0.57–0.67]). Analyses adjusted for baseline characteristics showed associations of Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury implementation with decreased ICU length of stay (adjusted ratio of geometric means [95% CI]) 0.86 [0.80–0.92]), hospital length of stay (0.92 [0.85–0.97]), and hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI], 0.81 (0.69–0.95).

CONCLUSIONS:

A quality-improvement intervention with remote simulation training to implement a decision support tool was associated with decreased nonadherence to daily care processes, shorter length of stay, and decreased mortality.

Brazilian guidelines for the management of brain-dead potential organ donors. The task force of the AMIB, ABTO, BRICNet, and the General Coordination of the National Transplant System

OBJECTIVE

To contribute to updating the recommendations for brain-dead potential organ donor management.

METHOD

A group of 27 experts, including intensivists, transplant coordinators, transplant surgeons, and epidemiologists, joined a task force formed by the General Coordination Office of the National Transplant System/Brazilian Ministry of Health (CGSNT-MS), the Brazilian Association of Intensive Care Medicine (AMIB), the Brazilian Association of Organ Transplantation (ABTO), and the Brazilian Research in Intensive Care Network (BRICNet). The questions were developed within the scope of the 2011 Brazilian Guidelines for Management of Adult Potential Multiple-Organ Deceased Donors. The topics were divided into mechanical ventilation, hemodynamic support, endocrine-metabolic management, infection, body temperature, blood transfusion, and use of checklists. The outcomes considered for decision-making were cardiac arrest, number of organs recovered or transplanted per donor, and graft function/survival. Rapid systematic reviews were conducted, and the quality of evidence of the recommendations was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Two expert panels were held in November 2016 and February 2017 to classify the recommendations. A systematic review update was performed in June 2020, and the recommendations were reviewed through a Delphi process with the panelists between June and July 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 19 recommendations were drawn from the expert panel. Of these, 7 were classified as strong (lung-protective ventilation strategy, vasopressors and combining arginine vasopressin to control blood pressure, antidiuretic hormones to control polyuria, serum potassium and magnesium control, and antibiotic use), 11 as weak (alveolar recruitment maneuvers, low-dose dopamine, low-dose corticosteroids, thyroid hormones, glycemic and serum sodium control, nutritional support, body temperature control or hypothermia, red blood cell transfusion, and goal-directed protocols), and 1 was considered a good clinical practice (volemic expansion).

CONCLUSION

Despite the agreement among panel members on most recommendations, the grade of recommendation was mostly weak. The observed lack of robust evidence on the topic highlights the importance of the present guideline to improve the management of brain-dead potential organ donors.

Benefits of collaborative patient care rounds in the intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

Improving care of critically ill patients requires using an interprofessional care model and care standardisation.

OBJECTIVES

Determine whether collaborative patient care rounds in the intensive care unit increases practice consistency with respect to common considerations such as delirium prevention, device use, and indicated prophylaxis, among others. Secondary objective to assess whether collaborative interprofessional format improved nursing perceptions of collaboration.

METHODS

Single centre, pre- and post- intervention design. collaborative patient care rounding format implemented in three intensive care units in an academic tertiary care centre. format consisted of scripted nursing presentation, provider checklist of additional practice considerations, and daily priority goals documentation. measurements included nursing participation, consideration of selected practice items, daily goal verbalisation, and nursing perception of collaboration.

RESULTS

Pre- and post-intervention measurements indicate gains in consideration of eight of thirteen bundle items (p < 0.05), with the greatest gains seen in nurse-presented items. Increases were observed in verbalisation of daily goals (59.8% versus 89.1%, p < 0.0001), nurse participation (83.9% versus 91.8%, p = 0.056), and nurse collaboration ratings (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

This study describes implementation of collaborative patient care rounds with corresponding increases in consideration of selected practice items, verbalisation of daily goals, and perceptions of collaboration.

Intelligent checklists improve checklist compliance in the intensive care unit: a prospective before-and-after mixed-method study

BACKGROUND

We examined whether a context and process-sensitive 'intelligent' checklist increases compliance with best practice compared with a paper checklist during intensive care ward rounds.

METHODS

We conducted a single-centre prospective before-and-after mixed-method trial in a 35 bed medical and surgical ICU. Daily ICU ward rounds were observed during two periods of 8 weeks. We compared paper checklists (control) with a dynamic (digital) clinical checklist (DCC, intervention). The primary outcome was compliance with best clinical practice, measured as the percentages of checked items and unchecked critical items. Secondary outcomes included ICU stay and the usability of digital checklists. Data are presented as median (interquartile range).

RESULTS

Clinical characteristics and severity of critical illness were similar during both control and intervention periods of study. A total of 36 clinicians visited 197 patients during 352 ward rounds using the paper checklist, compared with 211 patients during 366 ward rounds using the DCC. Per ICU round, a median of 100% of items (94.4-100.0) were completed by DCC, compared with 75.1% (66.7-86.4) by paper checklist (P=0.03). No critical items remained unchecked by the DCC, compared with 15.4% (8.3-27.3) by the paper checklist (P=0.01). The DCC was associated with reduced ICU stay (1 day [1-3]), compared with the paper checklist (2 days [1-4]; P=0.05). Usability of the DCC was judged by clinicians to require further improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

A digital checklist improved compliance with best clinical practice, compared with a paper checklist, during ward rounds on a mixed ICU.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03599856.

Telemedicine in the intensive care unit: A vehicle to improve quality of care?

The high demand for intensive care, which is predicted to further increase in the future, is contrasted by a shortage of trained intensivists and specialized nurses. Telemedicine has been heralded as a promising solution. Yet, there is considerable heterogeneity in tele-critical care when it comes to measurable effects. However, the focus has been on telemedical solutions substituting on-site intensivist functions, and outcome measures have primarily been mortality and length of stay. In a new model of telemedicine for the ICU, telemedicine could be used to increase adherence to best practice guidelines and indicators of process quality. Further, indicators of process quality, functional outcomes and quality of life measures should be incorporated in the evaluation of outcomes, as patients frequently value those higher than mere survival.

[Anti-infective treatment : Treatment strategies for sepsis and septic shock]

Sepsis and septic shock are still associated with a high mortality and morbidity. A decisive factor for improvement of the outcome is the prompt initiation of an effective antibiotic treatment. The early recognition of sepsis within the first hour is here one of the biggest challenges. Effective empirical treatment comprises purposefully selected broad-spectrum antibiotics and also combination treatment or antimycotics in special situations. De-escalation strategies to narrow down or shorten the treatment are safe and can limit the side effects.

Effectiveness of a Daily Rounding Checklist on Processes of Care and Outcomes in Diverse Pediatric Intensive Care Units Across the World

BACKGROUND

Implementation of checklists has been shown to be effective in improving patient safety. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of implementation of a checklist for daily care processes into clinical practice of pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) with limited resources.

METHODS

Prospective before-after study in eight PICUs from China, Congo, Croatia, Fiji, and India after implementation of a daily checklist into the ICU rounds.

RESULTS

Seven hundred and thirty-five patients from eight centers were enrolled between 2015 and 2017. Baseline stage had 292 patients and post-implementation 443. The ICU length of stay post-implementation decreased significantly [9.4 (4-15.5) vs. 7.3 (3.4-13.4) days, p = 0.01], with a nominal improvement in the hospital length of stay [15.4 (8.4-25) vs. 12.6 (7.5-24.4) days, p = 0.055]. The hospital mortality and ICU mortality between baseline group and post-implementation group did not show a significant difference, 14.4% vs. 11.3%; p = 0.22 for each. There was a variable impact of checklist implementation on adherence to various processes of care recommendations. A decreased exposure in days was noticed for; mechanical ventilation from 42.6% to 33.8%, p < 0.01; central line from 31.3% to 25.3%, p < 0.01; and urinary catheter from 30.6% to 24.4%, p < 0.01. Although there was an increased utilization of antimicrobials (89.9-93.2%, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Checklists for the treatment of acute illness and injury in the PICU setting marginally impacted the outcome and processes of care. The intervention led to increasing adherence with guidelines in multiple ICU processes and led to decreased length of stay.

Cluster randomized trial of an antibiotic time-out led by a team-based pharmacist

OBJECTIVE

Antibiotic time-outs (ATOs) have been advocated to improve antibiotic use without dedicated stewardship resources, but their utility is poorly defined. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of an ATO led by a team-based pharmacist.

DESIGN

Cluster randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Six medicine teams at an academic medical facility.

PATIENTS

Inpatients who received antibiotics and were cared for by a medicine team.

INTERVENTION

In phase A (2 months) pharmacist-led ATOs were implemented on 3 medicine teams (ATO-A) while 3 teams maintained usual care (UC-A). In phase B (2 months), ATOs were continued in the ATO group (ATO-B) and ATOs were initiated in the UC group (UC ATO-B). We targeted 2 ATO points: early (<72 hours after antibiotics were initiated) and late (after the early period but ≤5 days after antibiotic initiation).

RESULTS

In total, 290 ATOs were documented (181 early, 87 late, and 22 subsequent) among 538 admissions. The most common ATO recommendations were narrow therapy (148 of 290), no change (124 of 290), and change to oral (30 of 290). ATO initiation was lower in the UC ATO-B group than in either ATO group (21.8% UC ATO-B vs 69.2% ATO-A and -B). Overall antibiotic use was not different between the groups (P = .51), although intravenous (IV) levofloxacin use decreased in the UC group after ATO implementation (49 DOT/1,000 PD vs 20 DOT/1,000 PD; P = .022). The ratio of oral (PO) to intravenous (IV) DOT was lower in the UC group than in any of the ATO groups (P = .032). We detected no differences in mortality, length of stay, readmission, C. difficile infection, or antibiotic adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a pharmacist-led ATO was feasible and well accepted but did not change overall antibiotic use. An ATO may promote increased use of oral antibiotics, but more effective strategies for self-stewardship are needed.

Standardising care in the ICU: a protocol for a scoping review of tools used to improve care delivery

BACKGROUND

Increasing numbers of critically ill patients experience a prolonged intensive care unit stay contributing to greater physical and psychological morbidity, strain on families and cost to health systems. Quality improvement tools such as checklists concisely articulate best practices with the aim of improving quality and safety; however, these tools have not been designed for the specific needs of patients with prolonged ICU stay. The primary objective of this review will be to determine the characteristics including format and content of multicomponent tools designed to standardise or improve ICU care. Secondary objectives are to describe the outcomes reported in these tools, the type of patients and settings studied, and to understand how these tools were developed and implemented in clinical practice.

METHODS

We will search the Cochrane Library, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, OpenGrey, NHS evidence and Trial Registries from January 2000 onwards. We will include primary research studies (e.g. experimental, quasi-experimental, observational and qualitative studies) recruiting more than 10 adult participants admitted to ICUs, high dependency units and weaning centres regardless of length of stay, describing quality improvement tools such as structured care plans or checklists designed to standardize more than one aspect of care delivery. We will extract data on study and patient characteristics, tool design and implementation strategies and measured outcomes. Two reviewers will independently screen citations for eligible studies and perform data extraction. Data will be synthesised with descriptive statistics; we will use a narrative synthesis to describe review findings.

DISCUSSION

The findings will be used to guide development of tools for use with prolonged ICU stay patients. Our group will use experience-based co-design methods to identify the most important actionable processes of care to include in quality improvement tools these patients. Such tools are needed to standardise practice and thereby improve quality of care. Illustrating the development and implementation methods used for such tools will help to guide translation of similar tools into ICU clinical practice and future research.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

This protocol is registered on the Open Science Framework, https://osf.io/ , DOI https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/Z8MRE.

Surgical Intensive Care Unit Admission Variables Predict Subsequent Readmission

Intensive care unit (ICU) readmissions are associated with increased resource use. Defining predictors may improve resource use. Surgical ICU patients requiring readmission will have different characteristics than those who do not. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained database. The Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV quality database identified patients admitted January 1 through December 31, 2011. Patients were divided into groups: NREA = patients admitted to the ICU, discharged, and not readmitted versus REA = patients admitted to the ICU, discharged, and readmitted. Comparisons were made at index admission, not readmission. Categorical variables were compared by Fisher's exact testing and continuous variables by t test. Multivariate logistic regression identified independent predictors of readmission. There were 765 admissions. Seventy-seven patients required readmission 94 times (12.8% rate). Sixty-two patients died on initial ICU admission. Admission severity of illness was significantly higher (APACHE III score: 69.54 ± 21.11 vs 54.88 ± 23.48) in the REA group. Discharge acute physiology scores were equal between groups (47.0 ± 39.2 vs 44.2 ± 34.0, P = nonsignificant). In multivariate analysis, REA patients were more likely admitted to emergency surgery (odds ratio, 1.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.01 ± 3.5) more likely to have a history of immunosuppression (2.7, 1.4 ± 5.3) or higher Acute Physiology Score (1.02; 1.0 ± 1.03) than NREA. Patients who require ICU readmission have a different admission profile than those who do not “bounce back.” Understanding these differences may allow for quality improvement projects such as instituting different discharge criteria for different patient populations.

Statistical analysis plan for a cluster-randomised trial assessing the effectiveness of implementation of a bedside evidence-based checklist for clinical management of brain-dead potential organ donors in intensive care units: DONORS (Donation Network to Optimise Organ Recovery Study)

Background

The quality of clinical care of brain-dead potential organ donors may help reduce donor losses caused by irreversible or unreversed cardiac arrest and increase the number of organs donated. We sought to determine whether an evidence-based, goal-directed checklist for donor management in intensive care units (ICUs) can reduce donor losses to cardiac arrest.

Methods/design

The DONORS study is a multicentre, cluster-randomised controlled trial with a 1:1 allocation ratio designed to compare an intervention group (goal-directed checklist for brain-dead potential organ donor management) with a control group (standard ICU care). The primary outcome is loss of potential donors due to cardiac arrest. Secondary outcomes are the number of actual organ donors and the number of solid organs recovered per actual donor. Exploratory outcomes include the achievement of relevant clinical goals during the management of brain-dead potential organ donors. The present statistical analysis plan (SAP) describes all primary statistical procedures that will be used to evaluate the results and perform exploratory and sensitivity analyses of the trial.

Discussion

The SAP of the DONORS study aims to describe its analytic procedures, enhancing the transparency of the study. At the moment of SAP subsmission, 63 institutions have been randomised and were enrolling study participants. Thus, the analyses reported herein have been defined before the end of the study recruitment and database locking.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03179020. Registered on 7 June 2017.

Impact of a multidisciplinary checklist on the duration of invasive mechanical ventilation and length of ICU stay

Objective:

To assess the impact that implementing a checklist during daily multidisciplinary rounds has on the duration of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and length of ICU stay.

Methods:

This was a non-randomized clinical trial in which the pre-intervention and post-intervention duration of IMV and length of ICU stay were evaluated in a total of 466 patients, including historical controls, treated in three ICUs of a hospital in the city of Caxias do Sul, Brazil. We evaluated 235 and 231 patients in the pre-intervention and post-intervention periods, respectively. The following variables were studied: age; gender; cause of hospitalization; diagnosis on admission; comorbidities; the Simplified Acute Physiology Score 3; the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score; days in the ICU; days on IMV; reintubation; readmission; in-hospital mortality; and ICU mortality.

Results:

After the implementation of the checklist, the median (interquartile range) for days in the ICU and for days on IMV decreased from 8 (4-17) to 5 (3-11) and from 5 (1-12) to 2 (< 1-7), respectively, and the differences were significant (p ≤ 0.001 for both).

Conclusions:

The implementation of the checklist during daily multidisciplinary rounds was associated with a reduction in the duration of IMV and length of ICU stay among the patients in our sample.

Educational Strategies for Training in Quality Improvement and Implementation Medicine

Education in quality improvement (QI) is endorsed by the Association of American Medical Colleges across the spectrum of undergraduate, graduate, and postgraduate training. QI training is also a required component of graduate medical training per the American College of Graduate Medical Education. Despite widespread recognition of the importance of QI education and high levels of trainee involvement in QI as reported by pulmonary and critical care fellowship program directors, significant barriers to the implementation of effective and meaningful QI education during training exist. This creates an opportunity for the promotion of successfully implemented QI programs. Research demonstrates that successful QI educational programs involve the teaching of key QI concepts, participation in QI projects, protected time for QI project development, and institutional support. Using QI models such as the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle and the Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence framework for reporting new knowledge about healthcare improvements also enhances both the educational value of the QI project and prospects for wider scholarly dissemination. In this perspective article, three examples of QI projects are discussed that serve to illustrate effective strategies of QI implementation.

Surviving sepsis campaign international guidelines for the management of septic shock and sepsis-associated organ dysfunction in children

OBJECTIVES

To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for children (including infants, school-aged children, and adolescents) with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction.

DESIGN

A panel of 49 international experts, representing 12 international organizations, as well as three methodologists and three public members was convened. Panel members assembled at key international meetings (for those panel members attending the conference), and a stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in November 2018. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the chairs, co-chairs, methodologists, and group heads, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development process.

METHODS

The panel consisted of six subgroups: recognition and management of infection, hemodynamics and resuscitation, ventilation, endocrine and metabolic therapies, adjunctive therapies, and research priorities. We conducted a systematic review for each Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes question to identify the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence, and then assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or as a best practice statement. In addition, "in our practice" statements were included when evidence was inconclusive to issue a recommendation, but the panel felt that some guidance based on practice patterns may be appropriate.

RESULTS

The panel provided 77 statements on the management and resuscitation of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction. Overall, six were strong recommendations, 49 were weak recommendations, and nine were best-practice statements. For 13 questions, no recommendations could be made; but, for 10 of these, "in our practice" statements were provided. In addition, 52 research priorities were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

A large cohort of international experts was able to achieve consensus regarding many recommendations for the best care of children with sepsis, acknowledging that most aspects of care had relatively low quality of evidence resulting in the frequent issuance of weak recommendations. Despite this challenge, these recommendations regarding the management of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction provide a foundation for consistent care to improve outcomes and inform future research.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign International Guidelines for the Management of Septic Shock and Sepsis-Associated Organ Dysfunction in Children

OBJECTIVES

To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for children (including infants, school-aged children, and adolescents) with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction.

DESIGN

A panel of 49 international experts, representing 12 international organizations, as well as three methodologists and three public members was convened. Panel members assembled at key international meetings (for those panel members attending the conference), and a stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in November 2018. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the chairs, co-chairs, methodologists, and group heads, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development process.

METHODS

The panel consisted of six subgroups: recognition and management of infection, hemodynamics and resuscitation, ventilation, endocrine and metabolic therapies, adjunctive therapies, and research priorities. We conducted a systematic review for each Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes question to identify the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence, and then assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or as a best practice statement. In addition, "in our practice" statements were included when evidence was inconclusive to issue a recommendation, but the panel felt that some guidance based on practice patterns may be appropriate.

RESULTS

The panel provided 77 statements on the management and resuscitation of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction. Overall, six were strong recommendations, 52 were weak recommendations, and nine were best-practice statements. For 13 questions, no recommendations could be made; but, for 10 of these, "in our practice" statements were provided. In addition, 49 research priorities were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

A large cohort of international experts was able to achieve consensus regarding many recommendations for the best care of children with sepsis, acknowledging that most aspects of care had relatively low quality of evidence resulting in the frequent issuance of weak recommendations. Despite this challenge, these recommendations regarding the management of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction provide a foundation for consistent care to improve outcomes and inform future research.

Impact of the stress ulcer prophylactic protocol on reducing the unnecessary administration of stress ulcer medications and gastrointestinal bleeding: a single-center, retrospective pre-post study

Background

Clinically significant gastrointestinal bleeding from stress ulcers increases patient mortality in intensive care, and histamine type 2 receptor blockers and proton pump inhibitors as stress ulcer prophylaxes were reported to decrease the incidence of that.

Although medical checklists are widely used to maintain high compliance with medications and interventions to improve patient outcome in the intensive care field, the efficacy of medical checklists regarding the incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding and the reduction of unnecessary administration of stress ulcer prophylaxis medications has not been sufficiently explored to date.

This study aimed to investigate the incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding and the rate of administering stress ulcer prophylaxis medication before and after setting administration criteria for stress ulcer prophylaxis and introducing a medical checklist for critically ill adults.

Methods

This was a retrospective pre-post study at a single-center, tertiary adult and pediatric mixed ICU. Adult patients (≥ 18 years) who were admitted to the ICU for reasons other than gastrectomy, esophagectomy, pancreatoduodenectomy, and gastrointestinal bleeding were analyzed. A medical checklist and stress ulcer prophylaxis criteria were introduced on December 22, 2014, and the patients were classified into the preintervention group (from September to December 21, 2014) and the postintervention group (from December 22, 2014, to April 2015). The primary outcome was the incidence of upper gastrointestinal bleeding, and the secondary outcome was the proportion administered stress ulcer prophylaxis medications.

Results

One hundred adult patients were analyzed. The incidence of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the pre- and postintervention groups was both 4.0% [95% confidence interval, 0.5–13.7%]. The proportion administered stress ulcer prophylaxis medications decreased from 100 to 38% between the pre- and post-intervention groups.

Conclusions

After the checklist and the criteria were introduced, the administration of stress ulcer prophylaxis medications decreased without an increase in upper gastrointestinal bleeding in critically ill adults. Prospective studies are necessary to evaluate the causal relationship between the introduction of them and gastrointestinal adverse events in critically ill adults.

Twelve tips for conducting successful interprofessional teaching rounds

Inpatient bedside teaching rounds provide an opportunity to foster effective interprofessional collaboration between members of the healthcare team. Although effective interprofessional practice has been shown to improve patient satisfaction, patient outcomes, and job satisfaction, there is limited literature for successful implementation of interprofessional teaching rounds. To address this gap, we have compiled 12 tips for conducting effective interprofessional bedside teaching rounds. These tips offer strategies for creating a structured rounding system, with clear delineation of expectations, defined opportunities for learning across disciplines, and active engagement of and respect for all team members. By adopting and promoting this model of interprofessional collaborative practice, the quality and effectiveness of bedside teaching rounds can be improved for the benefit of patients, trainees, and the team as a whole.

Manually-generated reminders delivered on paper: effects on professional practice and patient outcomes

BACKGROUND

Health professionals sometimes do not use the best evidence to treat their patients, in part due to unconscious acts of omission and information overload. Reminders help clinicians overcome these problems by prompting them to recall information that they already know, or by presenting information in a different and more accessible format. Manually-generated reminders delivered on paper are defined as information given to the health professional with each patient or encounter, provided on paper, in which no computer is involved in the production or delivery of the reminder. Manually-generated reminders delivered on paper are relatively cheap interventions, and are especially relevant in settings where electronic clinical records are not widely available and affordable. This review is one of three Cochrane Reviews focused on the effectiveness of reminders in health care.

OBJECTIVES

1. To determine the effectiveness of manually-generated reminders delivered on paper in changing professional practice and improving patient outcomes. 2. To explore whether a number of potential effect modifiers influence the effectiveness of manually-generated reminders delivered on paper.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and two trials registers on 5 December 2018. We searched grey literature, screened individual journals, conference proceedings and relevant systematic reviews, and reviewed reference lists and cited references of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and non-randomised trials assessing the impact of manually-generated reminders delivered on paper as a single intervention (compared with usual care) or added to one or more co-interventions as a multicomponent intervention (compared with the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component) on professional practice or patients' outcomes. We also included randomised and non-randomised trials comparing manually-generated reminders with other quality improvement (QI) interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened studies for eligibility and abstracted data independently. We extracted the primary outcome as defined by the authors or calculated the median effect size across all reported outcomes in each study. We then calculated the median percentage improvement and interquartile range across the included studies that reported improvement related outcomes, and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 63 studies (41 cluster-randomised trials, 18 individual randomised trials, and four non-randomised trials) that met all inclusion criteria. Fifty-seven studies reported usable data (64 comparisons). The studies were mainly located in North America (42 studies) and the UK (eight studies). Fifty-four studies took place in outpatient/ambulatory settings. The clinical areas most commonly targeted were cardiovascular disease management (11 studies), cancer screening (10 studies) and preventive care (10 studies), and most studies had physicians as their target population (57 studies). General management of a clinical condition (17 studies), test-ordering (14 studies) and prescription (10 studies) were the behaviours more commonly targeted by the intervention. Forty-eight studies reported changes in professional practice measured as dichotomous process adherence outcomes (e.g. compliance with guidelines recommendations), 16 reported those changes measured as continuous process-of-care outcomes (e.g. number of days with catheters), eight reported dichotomous patient outcomes (e.g. mortality rates) and five reported continuous patient outcomes (e.g. mean systolic blood pressure). Manually-generated reminders delivered on paper probably improve professional practice measured as dichotomous process adherence outcomes) compared with usual care (median improvement 8.45% (IQR 2.54% to 20.58%); 39 comparisons, 40,346 participants; moderate certainty of evidence) and may make little or no difference to continuous process-of-care outcomes (8 comparisons, 3263 participants; low certainty of evidence). Adding manually-generated paper reminders to one or more QI co-interventions may slightly improve professional practice measured as dichotomous process adherence outcomes (median improvement 4.24% (IQR -1.09% to 5.50%); 12 comparisons, 25,359 participants; low certainty of evidence) and probably slightly improve professional practice measured as continuous outcomes (median improvement 0.28 (IQR 0.04 to 0.51); 2 comparisons, 12,372 participants; moderate certainty of evidence). Compared with other QI interventions, manually-generated reminders may slightly decrease professional practice measured as process adherence outcomes (median decrease 7.9% (IQR -0.7% to 11%); 14 comparisons, 21,274 participants; low certainty of evidence). We are uncertain whether manually-generated reminders delivered on paper, compared with usual care or with other QI intervention, lead to better or worse patient outcomes (dichotomous or continuous), as the certainty of the evidence is very low (10 studies, 13 comparisons). Reminders added to other QI interventions may make little or no difference to patient outcomes (dichotomous or continuous) compared with the QI alone (2 studies, 2 comparisons). Regarding resource use, studies reported additional costs per additional point of effectiveness gained, but because of the different currencies and years used the relevance of those figures is uncertain. None of the included studies reported outcomes related to harms or adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Manually-generated reminders delivered on paper as a single intervention probably lead to small to moderate increases in outcomes related to adherence to clinical recommendations, and they could be used as a single QI intervention. It is uncertain whether reminders should be added to other QI intervention already in place in the health system, although the effects may be positive. If other QI interventions, such as patient or computerised reminders, are available, they should be preferred over manually-generated reminders, but under close evaluation in order to decrease uncertainty about their potential effect.

An international perspective on the frequency, perception of utility, and quality of interprofessional rounds practices in intensive care units

PURPOSE

To describe international variation in interprofessional rounds in intensive care units (ICUs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Survey of ICU clinicians on their practices and perceptions of rounds using societal mailing lists and social media.

RESULTS

Out of 2402 respondents, 1752 (72.8%) use rounds. Teams are mostly composed of intensivists, nurses and medical trainees. The majority of rounds (57.5%) last >2 h, and North Americans report the highest rates of rounds allowing family attendance (92.4%). Shorter rounds (1-2 h, OR 0.67, 0.52-0.86, p < 0.01; <1 h, OR 0.72, 0.53-0.97, p = 0.03), and strategies such as designating a person for writing (OR 0.73, 0.57-0.95, p = 0.01), and designating a person to assist other patients (OR 0.75, 0.57-0.98, p = 0.04) are associated with a lower perception of negative outcomes. Using daily goals during rounds is associated with a higher perception of positive outcomes (OR 1.85, 1.17-2.90, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Three-quarters of respondents perform rounds, and models of rounds are heterogeneous, creating challenges for future studies on improving rounds. Respondents reporting better outcomes also experience shorter rounds, and adopt strategies such as discussion of daily goals, and designation individuals for writing or assisting other patients during rounds.

Integrating a safety smart list into the electronic health record decreases intensive care unit length of stay and cost

PURPOSE

To measure how an integrated smartlist developed for critically ill patients would change intensive care units (ICUs) length of stay (LOS), mortality, and charges.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Propensity-score analysis of adult patients admitted to one of 14 surgical and medical ICUs between June 2017 and May 2018. The smart list aimed to certain preventative measures for all critical patients (e.g., removing unneeded catheters, starting thromboembolic prophylaxis, etc.) and was integrated into the electronic health record workflows at the hospitals under study.

RESULTS

During the study period, 11,979 patients were treated in the 14 participating ICUs by 518 unique providers. Patients who had the smart list used during ≥60% of their ICU stay (N = 432 patients, 3.6%) were significantly more likely to have a shorter ICU LOS (HR = 1.20, 95% CI:1.0 to 1.4, p = 0.015) with an average decrease of -$1218 (95% CI: -$1830 to -$607, P < 0.001) in the amount charged per day. The intervention cohort had fewer average ventilator days (3.05 vent days, SD = 2.55) compared to propensity score matched controls (3.99, SD = 4.68, p = 0.015), but no changes in mortality (16.7% vs 16.0%, p = 0.78).

CONCLUSIONS

An integrated smart list shortened LOS and lowered charges in a diverse cohort of critically ill patients.

Application, verification and correction from an elaborate checklist with some of the recommendations («do and do not do») of the SEMICYUC working groups

OBJECTIVE

Based on some of the recommendations of the SEMICYUC working groups, we developed a checklist and applied it in 2 periods, analyzing their behavior as a tool for improving safety.

DESIGN

A comparative pre- and post-intervention longitudinal study was carried out.

SETTING

The Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of a 400-bed university hospital.

PATIENTS

Random cases series in 2 periods separated by 6 months.

INTERVENTIONS

We developed a checklist with 24 selected indicators that were randomly applied to 50 patients. Verification was conducted by a professional not related to care (prompter). We analyzed the results and compliance index and carried out corrective measures with training. With 6 months of preparation, we again applied the random checklist to 50 patients (post-intervention period) and compared the compliance indexes between the two timepoints.

RESULTS

There were no differences in demographic characteristics or evolution between the periods. The compliance index at baseline was 0.86±0.12 versus 0.91±0.52 in the post-intervention period (P=.023). An acceptable compliance index was obtained with the 24 indicators, though at baseline the compliance index was<0.85 for 5 recommendations. These detected non-compliances were worked upon through training in the second phase of the study. The post-intervention checklist evidenced improvement in compliance with the recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

The checklist used to assess compliance with a selection of recommendations of the SEMICYUC applied and moderated by a prompter was seen to be a useful instrument allowing us to identify points for improvement in the management of Intensive Care Unit patients, increasing the quality and safety of care.

The Association of ICU Acuity With Outcomes of Patients at Low Risk of Dying

OBJECTIVE

Many ICU patients do not require critical care interventions. Whether aggressive care environments increase risks to low-acuity patients is unknown. We evaluated whether ICU acuity was associated with outcomes of low mortality-risk patients. We hypothesized that admission to high-acuity ICUs would be associated with worse outcomes. This hypothesis was based on two possibilities: 1) high-acuity ICUs may have a culture of aggressive therapy that could lead to potentially avoidable complications and 2) high-acuity ICUs may focus attention toward the many sicker patients and away from the fewer low-risk patients.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Three hundred twenty-two ICUs in 199 hospitals in the Philips eICU database between 2010 and 2015.

PATIENTS

Adult ICU patients at low risk of dying, defined as an Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-IVa-predicted mortality of 3% or less.

EXPOSURE

ICU acuity, defined as the mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IVa score of all admitted patients in a calendar year, stratified into quartiles.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We used generalized estimating equations to test whether ICU acuity is independently associated with a primary outcome of ICU length of stay and secondary outcomes of hospital length of stay, hospital mortality, and discharge destination. The study included 381,997 low-risk patients. Mean ICU and hospital length of stay were 1.8 ± 2.1 and 5.2 ± 5.0 days, respectively. Mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IVa-predicted hospital mortality was 1.6% ± 0.8%; actual hospital mortality was 0.7%. In adjusted analyses, admission to low-acuity ICUs was associated with worse outcomes compared with higher-acuity ICUs. Specifically, compared with the highest-acuity quartile, ICU length of stay in low-acuity ICUs was increased by 0.24 days; in medium-acuity ICUs by 0.16 days; and in high-acuity ICUs by 0.09 days (all p < 0.001). Similar patterns existed for hospital length of stay. Patients in lower-acuity ICUs had significantly higher hospital mortality (odds ratio, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.10-1.49] for low-; 1.24 [95% CI, 1.07-1.42] for medium-, and 1.14 [95% CI, 0.99-1.31] for high-acuity ICUs) and lower likelihood of discharge home (odds ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.82-0.90] for low-, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.85-0.92] for medium-, and 0.95 [95% CI, 0.92-0.99] for high-acuity ICUs).

CONCLUSIONS

Admission to high-acuity ICUs is associated with better outcomes among low mortality-risk patients. Future research should aim to understand factors that confer benefit to patients with different risk profiles.

Prompting Rounding Teams to Address a Daily Best Practice Checklist in a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit

BACKGROUND

Implementation of best practices for pediatric ICU (PICU) patients is challenging. The objective of this project was to improve process of care outcomes and clinical outcomes by having a dedicated person (quality champion [QC]) prompt PICU rounding teams to address a daily best practice rounding checklist.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was performed in an academic tertiary referral PICU, which implemented a daily rounding checklist, including reminders to assess central line/urinary catheter need, sedation goals, sedative/paralytic need, enteral nutrition readiness, and extubation readiness. Data were collected on patient characteristics, process of care outcomes, and clinical outcomes over three periods: before and after the checklist was implemented and after the practice of prompting for checklist use was instituted.

RESULTS

Over nine months, 444 patients were included. The QC was present on rounds 94 of 139 (67.6%) days. Checklist adherence (all checklist items discussed daily) improved from 75.7% to 86.6% of patients. There was a reduction in urinary catheter days across all time periods (p = 0.001), and post hoc analysis showed fewer blood draws (p = 0.049) among patients for whom the QC was present consistently during rounds. There was also a decrease in PICU length of stay after the checklist was implemented (p = 0.008), although this may be due to less severity of illness in the prompted cohort.

CONCLUSION

Prompting PICU rounding teams to address a daily best practice rounding checklist may improve some process of care outcomes. Further study is needed to delineate long-term effects of this initiative.

Impact of a checklist used by pharmacists on hospital antimicrobial use: a patient-level interrupted time series study

BACKGROUND

Antimicrobial misuse leading to drug resistance is a growing concern for clinicians. Improving antimicrobial stewardship programmes through development of new tools could be part of the solution.

AIM

To evaluate antimicrobial use in hospitalized patients after implementation of an antimicrobial checklist for ward-based clinical pharmacists.

METHODS

A checklist based on quality indicators of optimal antimicrobial use was implemented to standardize hospital pharmacists' assessments of antimicrobial therapy. Antimicrobial use metrics from adults hospitalized during the control and intervention periods were assessed in an interrupted time series analysis of individual patient data. The primary endpoint was days of therapy (DOT) for all antimicrobials per 1000 days present for included patients. Secondary endpoints were the DOT of extended-spectrum antimicrobials (DOT-ES), length of therapy of all antimicrobials (LOT) and the number of pharmacist interventions.

FINDINGS

One-thousand six-hundred and nineteen patients were included: 800 and 819 in the pre- and post-checklist implementation periods, respectively. As indicated by the point estimates and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs), there were no changes in trend for DOT, DOT-ES or LOT. A change in level was not found for the DOT, while a change of -118 DOT-ES [-209,-28] and -51 LOT [-97,-4] was documented. Furthermore, pharmacists' interventions regarding antimicrobials increased by 18.7% (14.0, 23.5) and progress notes by 32.3% (27.8, 36.8).

CONCLUSION

An antimicrobial checklist used by ward-based clinical pharmacists did not decrease DOT for all antimicrobials, but decreased DOT-ES and LOT upon its implementation.

DONORS (Donation Network to Optimise Organ Recovery Study): Study protocol to evaluate the implementation of an evidence-based checklist for brain-dead potential organ donor management in intensive care units, a cluster randomised trial

INTRODUCTION

There is an increasing demand for multi-organ donors for organ transplantation programmes. This study protocol describes the Donation Network to Optimise Organ Recovery Study, a planned cluster randomised controlled trial that aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation of an evidence-based, goal-directed checklist for brain-dead potential organ donor management in intensive care units (ICUs) in reducing the loss of potential donors due to cardiac arrest.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study will include ICUs of at least 60 Brazilian sites with an average of ≥10 annual notifications of valid potential organ donors. Hospitals will be randomly assigned (with a 1:1 allocation ratio) to the intervention group, which will involve the implementation of an evidence-based, goal-directed checklist for potential organ donor maintenance, or the control group, which will maintain the usual care practices of the ICU. Team members from all participating ICUs will receive training on how to conduct family interviews for organ donation. The primary outcome will be loss of potential donors due to cardiac arrest. Secondary outcomes will include the number of actual organ donors and the number of organs recovered per actual donor.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The institutional review board (IRB) of the coordinating centre and of each participating site individually approved the study. We requested a waiver of informed consent for the IRB of each site. Study results will be disseminated to the general medical community through publications in peer-reviewed medical journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03179020; Pre-results.

Critical Care in the Military Health System: A 24-h Point Prevalence Study

Background

Healthcare expenditures are a significant economic cost with critical care services constituting one of its largest components. The Military Health System (MHS) is the largest, global healthcare system of its kind. In this project, we sought to describe critical care services and the patients who receive them in the MHS.

Methods

We surveyed 26 military treatment facilities (MTFs) representing 38 critical care services or intensive care units (ICUs). MTFs with multiple ICUs and critical care services responded to the survey as services (e.g., surgical or medical ICU service), whereas MTFs with only one ICU responded as a unit and gave information about all types of patients (i.e., medical and surgical). Our survey was divided into an administrative portion and a 24-h point prevalence survey of patients and patient care. The administrative portion is reported separately in this journal. The 24-h point prevalence survey collected information about all patients present in, admitted to, or discharged from participating services/units during the same 24-h period in December 2014. The survey was anonymous and protected health information was not collected.

Findings

Sixteen MTFs (69%) and 27 ICU services/units (71%) returned the point prevalence survey. MTFs with >200 beds (n = 3, 22%) were categorized as "high capacity centers" (HCCs) whereas those with ≤200 beds (n = 13, 78%) were characterized as low capacity centers (LCCs). Two MTFs (one HCC and one LCC) returned only administrative data. The remaining 16 MTFs reported data about 151 patients. In all, 100 (67%) of the patients were at three HCCs during this study period. One HCC accounted for 39% (59 patients) of all patient care during this study. Most patients were cared for in mixed medical/surgical ICUs (34.4%), followed by medical (21.2%), surgical (18.5%), trauma (11.9%), cardiac (7.9%), and burn (6.0%) ICUs. The most common medical indication for admission was cardiac followed by general medical. The most common surgical indications for admission were trauma, other, and cardiothoracic surgery. The average APACHE II score of all patients across both LCCs and HCCs was 11 ± 8.1 (8 ± 7.8 vs. 13 ± 7.7 p = 0.008). The lower acuity of patients in this study is reflected in a high turnover rate, low rate of arterial and central line placements (33%), and low rates of life support (all types, 30%; mechanical ventilation only, 21.2%; noninvasive mechanic ventilation only, 7.9%; and vasoactive medications, 6.6%). Thirty-five (23.2%) patients within the study were affected by a total of 57 complications. The three most common complications experienced were acute kidney injury, bleeding, and sepsis.

Discussion

This is the first detailed report about MHS critical care services and the patients receiving care. It describes a low acuity ICU patient population, concentrated at larger MTFs. This study highlights the need for the establishment of a system that allows for the continuous collection of high priority information about clinical care in the MHS in order to facilitate implementation of standardized protocols and process improvements.

Improving Reliability to a Care Goal Rounding Template in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit

Background:

Effective pediatric intensive care requires addressing many important aspects of care delivery during morning rounds, often achieved using a rounding checklist. Our objective was to develop a care goal rounding template and then double the reliability of discussion of rounding topics during morning rounds without the use of a checklist.

Methods:

The Institute for Healthcare Improvement Model for Improvement was used for this initiative. A care goal rounding template was established through discussions and consensus with pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) faculty. Rounds were audited in a blinded fashion over a 3-month period to obtain baseline data on rounding topic discussion. Three interventions were then trialed (plan, do, study, act cycles) over a 12-month period. Weekly reliability in rounding topic discussion was tracked.

Results:

Baseline reliability with discussion of rounding topics was 36%. The first intervention included the use of a standardized progress note in the electronic health record, which contained topics and served to prompt the discussion on rounds. The second intervention was implementation of laminated cards provided to PICU fellows highlighting the elements of the care goal rounding template. The third intervention addressed a standardized handoff sheet often used during rounds. Mean reliability for discussion of rounding topics improved to 52% shortly following the second intervention. Reliability was sustained more than 1 year later.

Conclusions:

Following the establishment of a PICU care goal rounding template and various interventions, the reliability in discussing important care goal elements on patient rounds improved.

Why do we fail to deliver evidence-based practice in critical care medicine?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The use of evidence-based practices in clinical practice is frequently inadequate. Recent research has uncovered many barriers to the implementation of evidence-based practices in critical care medicine. Using a comprehensive conceptual framework, this review identifies and classifies the barriers to implementation of several major critical care evidence-based practices.

RECENT FINDINGS

The many barriers that have been recently identified can be classified into domains of the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR). Barriers to the management of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) include ARDS under-recognition. Barriers to the use of the awakening and breathing coordination, delirium monitoring/management, and early exercise/mobility (ABCDE) bundle for mechanically ventilated patients and the sepsis bundle include patient-related, clinician-related, protocol-related, contextual-related, and intervention-related factors. Although these many barriers can be classified into all five CFIR domains (intervention, outer setting, inner setting, individuals, and process), most barriers fall within the individuals and inner setting domains.

SUMMARY

There are many barriers to the implementation of evidence-based practice in critical care medicine. Systematically classifying these barriers allows implementation researchers and clinicians to design targeted implementation strategies, giving them the greatest chance of success in improving the use of evidence-based practice.

Teamwork in the intensive care unit

Intensive care units (ICUs) provide care to the most severely ill hospitalized patients. Although ICUs increasingly rely on interprofessional teams to provide critical care, little about actual teamwork in this context is well understood. The ICU team is typically comprised of physicians or intensivists, clinical pharmacists, respiratory therapists, dieticians, bedside nurses, clinical psychologists, and clinicians-in-training. ICU teams are distinguished from other health care teams in that they are low in temporal stability, which can impede important team dynamics. Furthermore, ICU teams must work in physically and emotionally challenging environments. Our review of the literature reveals the importance of information sharing and decision-making processes, and identifies potential barriers to successful team performance, including the lack of effective conflict management and the presence of multiple and sometimes conflicting goals. Key knowledge gaps about ICU teams include the need for more actionable data linking ICU team structure to team functioning and patient-, family-, ICU-, and hospital-level outcomes. In particular, research is needed to better delineate and define the ICU team, identify additional psychosocial phenomena that impact ICU team performance, and address varying and often competing indicators of ICU team effectiveness as a multivariate and multilevel problem that requires better understanding of the independent effects and interdependencies between nested elements (i.e., hospitals, ICUs, and ICU teams). Ultimately, efforts to advance team-based care are essential for improving ICU performance, but more work is needed to develop actionable interventions that ensure that critically ill patients receive the best care possible. (PsycINFO Database Record

Impact of a Daily PICU Rounding Checklist on Urinary Catheter Utilization and Infection

INTRODUCTION

In critically ill children, inappropriate urinary catheter (UC) utilization is associated with increased morbidity, including catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs). Checklists are effective for reducing medical errors, but there is little data on their impact on device utilization in pediatric critical care. In this study, we evaluated UC utilization trends and CAUTI rate after implementing a daily rounding checklist.

METHODS

A retrospective review of our checklist database from 2006 through 2016 was performed. The study setting was a 36-bed pediatric intensive care unit in a quaternary-care pediatric hospital. Interventions included the "Daily QI Checklist" in 2006, ongoing education regarding device necessity, and a CAUTI prevention bundle in 2013. UC utilization and duration were assessed via auto-correlated time series models and Cochran-Armitage tests for trend. Changes in CAUTI rate were assessed via Poisson regression.

RESULTS

UC utilization decreased from 30% of patient-days in 2006 to 18% in 2016 (P < 0.0001, Cochran-Armitage trend test), while duration of UC use (median, 2.0 days; interquartile range, 1-4) did not change over time (P = 0.18). CAUTI rate declined from 9.49/1,000 UC-days in 2009 to 1.04 in 2016 (P = 0.0047).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of the checklist coincided with a sustained 40% reduction in UC utilization. The trend may be explained by a combination of more appropriate selection of patients for catheterization and improved timeliness of UC discontinuation. We also observed an 89% decline in CAUTI rate that occurred after stabilization of UC utilization. These findings underscore the potential impact of a checklist on incorporating best practices into daily care of critically ill children.