Dataset Information

ICU team composition and its association with ABCDE implementation in a quality collaborative.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Awakening, Breathing Coordination, Delirium, and Early Mobility bundle (ABCDE) should involve an interprofessional team, yet no studies describe what team composition supports implementation.

Materials & methods

We administered a survey at MHA Keystone Center ICU 2015 workshop. We measured team composition by the frequency of nurse, respiratory therapist, physician, physical therapist, nurse practitioner/physician assistant or nursing assistant involvement in 1) spontaneous awakening trials (SATs), 2) spontaneous breathing trials, 3) delirium and 4) early mobility. We assessed ABCDE implementation using a 5-point Likert ("routine part of every patient's care" - "no plans to implement"). We used ordinal logistic regression to examine team composition and ABCDE implementation, adjusting for confounders and clustering.

Results

From 293 surveys (75% response rate), we found that frequent nurse [OR 6.1 (1.1-34.9)] and physician involvement [OR 4.2 (1.3-13.4)] in SATs, nurse [OR 4.7 (1.6-13.4)] and nursing assistant's involvement [OR 3.9 (1.2-13.5)] in delirium and nurse [OR 2.8 (1.2-6.7)], physician [OR (3.6 (1.2-10.3)], and nursing assistants' involvement [OR 2.3 (1.1-4.8)] in early mobility were significantly associated with higher odds of routine ABCDE implementation.

Conclusions

ABCDE implementation was associated with frequent involvement of team members, suggesting a need for role articulation and coordination.

SUBMITTER: Costa DK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5831474 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

ICU team composition and its association with ABCDE implementation in a quality collaborative.

Costa Deena Kelly DK Valley Thomas S TS Miller Melissa A MA Manojlovich Milisa M Watson Sam R SR McLellan Phyllis P Pope Corine C Hyzy Robert C RC Iwashyna Theodore J TJ

Journal of critical care 20170928

<h4>Purpose</h4>Awakening, Breathing Coordination, Delirium, and Early Mobility bundle (ABCDE) should involve an interprofessional team, yet no studies describe what team composition supports implementation.<h4>Materials & methods</h4>We administered a survey at MHA Keystone Center ICU 2015 workshop. We measured team composition by the frequency of nurse, respiratory therapist, physician, physical therapist, nurse practitioner/physician assistant or nursing assistant involvement in 1) spontaneou ...[more]

PMID: 28978488

Similar Datasets

Project description:Initial Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory illness Universal Study (VIRUS) Registry analysis suggested that improvements in critical care processes offered the greatest modifiable opportunity to improve critically ill COVID-19 patient outcomes.ObjectivesThe Structured Team-based Optimal Patient-Centered Care for Virus COVID-19 ICU Collaborative was created to identify and speed implementation of best evidence based COVID-19 practices.Design setting and participantsThis 6-month project included volunteer interprofessional teams from VIRUS Registry sites, who received online training on the Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and iNjury approach, a structured and systematic method for delivering evidence based critical care. Collaborators participated in weekly 1-hour videoconference sessions on high impact topics, monthly quality improvement (QI) coaching sessions, and received extensive additional resources for asynchronous learning.Main outcomes and measuresOutcomes included learner engagement, satisfaction, and number of QI projects initiated by participating teams.ResultsEleven of 13 initial sites participated in the Collaborative from March 2, 2021, to September 29, 2021. A total of 67 learners participated in the Collaborative, including 23 nurses, 22 physicians, 10 pharmacists, nine respiratory therapists, and three nonclinicians. Site attendance among the 11 sites in the 25 videoconference sessions ranged between 82% and 100%, with three sites providing at least one team member for 100% of sessions. The majority reported that topics matched their scope of practice (69%) and would highly recommend the program to colleagues (77%). A total of nine QI projects were initiated across three clinical domains and focused on improving adherence to established critical care practice bundles, reducing nosocomial complications, and strengthening patient- and family-centered care in the ICU. Major factors impacting successful Collaborative engagement included an engaged interprofessional team; an established culture of engagement; opportunities to benchmark performance and accelerate institutional innovation, networking, and acclaim; and ready access to data that could be leveraged for QI purposes.Conclusions and relevanceUse of a virtual platform to establish a learning collaborative to accelerate the identification, dissemination, and implementation of critical care best practices for COVID-19 is feasible. Our experience offers important lessons for future collaborative efforts focused on improving ICU processes of care.

Project description:BackgroundInnovations to improve quality and safety in healthcare are increasingly complex, targeting multiple disciplines and organizational levels, and often requiring significant behavior change by those delivering care. Learning health systems must tackle the crucial task of understanding the implementation and effectiveness of complex interventions, but may be hampered in their efforts by limitations in study design imposed by business-cycle timelines and implementation into fast-paced clinical environments. Rapid assessment procedures are a pragmatic option for producing timely, contextually rich evaluative information about complex interventions implemented into dynamic clinical settings.MethodsWe describe our adaptation of rapid assessment procedures and introduce a rapid team-based analysis process using an example of an evaluation of an intensive care unit (ICU) redesign initiative aimed at improving patient safety in four academic medical centers across the USA. Steps in our approach included (1) iteratively working with stakeholders to develop evaluation questions; (2) integration of implementation science frameworks into field guides and analytic tools; (3) selecting and training a multidisciplinary site visit team; (4) preparation and trust building for 2-day site visits; (5) engaging sites in a participatory approach to data collection; (6) rapid team analysis and triangulation of data sources and methods using a priori charts derived from implementation frameworks; and (7) validation of findings with sites.ResultsWe used the rapid assessment approach at each of the four ICU sites to evaluate the implementation of the sites' innovations. Though the ICU projects all included three common components, they were individually developed to suit the local context and had mixed implementation outcomes. We generated in-depth case summaries describing the overall implementation process for each site; implementation barriers and facilitators for all four sites are presented. One of the site case summaries is presented as an example of findings generated using the method.ConclusionsA rapid team-based approach to qualitative analysis using charts and team discussion using validation techniques, such as member-checking, can be included as part of rapid assessment procedures. Our work demonstrates the value of including rapid assessment procedures for implementation research when time and resources are limited.

Project description:BackgroundEarly rehabilitation has been found to prevent delirium and weakness that can hamper the recovery of intensive care unit (ICU) survivors. Integrated clinical practice guidelines for managing patient pain, agitation and delirium (PAD) have been developed. The Awakening and Breathing Coordination, Delirium monitoring/management, and Early exercise/mobility (ABCDE) bundle provides a strategy to implement PAD guidelines into everyday clinical practice. However, there is limited evidence on the effectiveness of the ABCDE bundle in the literature.The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a full-scale randomised controlled trial comparing the ABCDE bundle to standard care in an ICU. Trial feasibility was defined as the successful recruitment and retention of trial participants, adherence to the intervention, identification of barriers to the intervention, and the rigorous collection of outcome data.MethodsA prospective, single-centre, randomised controlled feasibility study was conducted. Thirty adult mechanically ventilated participants were recruited from an eight-bed ICU in south east Queensland, Australia, between April 2015 and December 2015. Participants were randomised to receive either the ABCDE bundle or standard routine management. The ABCDE bundle integrated prescribed awakening and breathing trials, delirium monitoring and management, and prescribed exercise and mobility regimes. Feasibility outcomes measured included recruitment and retention rates, intervention fidelity, and the feasibility of participant outcome data collection. Outcome measurement assessors were blinded to participant assignment. It was not possible to blind the research team or the participant to group assignment.ResultsIn total, 30 (81.1%) of 37 eligible participants consented and were randomised to the intervention group (n = 15) or the control group (n = 15). Of these, 23 (76.6%) participants successfully completed the 90-day post discharge assessment. A lengthy recruitment period of 8 months was related to overly stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria. Intervention adherence exceeded defined success rates with participation in awakening and breathing trials, delirium monitoring and exercise interventions performed on 80.2, 97.4 and 90.2% of ventilated days respectively. Outcome assessments were successfully and accurately performed at ICU and hospital discharge and 90-day post hospital discharge. Intervention participants were deemed to be delirious on 39.6% of mechanically ventilated days indicating a requirement for a scripted regime to prevent delirium.ConclusionsWith minor adjustment of inclusion and exclusion criteria, the inclusion of delirium management protocols, and encouragement of family engagement and involvement, a large-scale definitive randomised controlled trial to test the impact of the ABCDEF bundle will be feasible.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry 12614000763640 Date registered 17/08/2014.

Project description:BackgroundApproximately half of all antimicrobial prescriptions in intensive care units (ICUs) may be inappropriate, including those prescribed when not needed, in unnecessary combinations or for longer durations than needed. Inappropriate prescribing is costly, exposes patients to unnecessary side-effects and drives population-level antimicrobial resistance, the prevalence and consequences of which are greatest in low- and middle-income countries. However, the implementation of interventions to improve the appropriateness of antimicrobial prescribing has been variable and requires further study.MethodsWe propose a type III hybrid implementation/effectiveness interventional cohort trial in 35 ICUs in up to 11 low- and middle- income countries. The study intervention is a structured review of antimicrobial prescriptions as recommended by the World Health Organisation. Strategies to support stakeholder-led implementation include development of local protocols, registry-enabled audit and feedback, and education. Evaluation of implementation, and the determinants of its success, is informed by the RE-AIM framework and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research respectively. The primary outcome is a composite measure of fidelity, reach and adoption. Secondary outcomes describe the effectiveness of the intervention on improving antimicrobial prescribing. Qualitative interviews will assess relevant implementation acceptability, adaptations and maintenance. A baseline survey will investigate ICU-level antimicrobial stewardship structures and processes.DiscussionThis study addresses global policy priorities by supporting implementation research of antimicrobial stewardship, and strengthening associated healthcare professional competencies. It does this in a setting where improvement is sorely needed: low- and middle- income country ICUs. The study will also describe the influence of pre-existing antimicrobial stewardship structures and processes on implementation and improve understanding about the efficacy of strategies to overcome barriers to implementation in these settings.Trial registrationThis study protocol has been registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (ref NCT06666738) on 31 Oct 2004. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06666738?term=NCT06666738&rank=1 .

Project description:ObjectiveUptake of evidence-informed health care transition processes among pediatric rheumatologists is low despite poor outcomes of transition from pediatric to adult care. We piloted a learning collaborative model to implement transition guides. We dually assessed implementation outcomes and changes in reported patient-care team discussions about transition.MethodsThis was a type II hybrid effectiveness-implementation pilot study of transition guide dissemination to patients at least 14 years old with rheumatic conditions across nine pediatric rheumatology centers in the Childhood Arthritis Rheumatology Research Alliance Transition Learning Collaborative. We evaluated implementation outcomes (feasibility, adaptations, and fidelity) and the proportion of patients surveyed that reported having discussions with their care team regarding transfer planning.ResultsSix sites were retained through the COVID-19 pandemic (below 70% target). Five out of six sites contributed outcome data (met 80% target) but with substantial heterogeneity in how transition guides were shared (eg, in-person, electronic messages, and posted flyers), and data were collected. The pooled proportion of respondents having discussed transfer planning with their care team was 39% preimplementation (n = 239; 95% confidence interval [CI] 32%-46%) and 55% postimplementation (n = 864; 95% CI 36%-73%). After implementation, there were significant increases in the likelihood of respondents recalling receiving a transition guide (odds ratio [OR] 2.58, 95% CI 1.35-4.92) and discussing transfer planning (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.30-3.52), adjusted for age and site of care.ConclusionTransition guide dissemination is a simple intervention associated with increased awareness among young people with rheumatic conditions and discussions with their care team about transition preparation. The learning collaborative model facilitated identification of several dissemination strategies adaptable to site-specific resources.

Dataset Information

ICU team composition and its association with ABCDE implementation in a quality collaborative.

Purpose

Materials & methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

ICU team composition and its association with ABCDE implementation in a quality collaborative.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets