Dataset Information

Mobility Action Group: Using Quality Improvement Methods to Create a Culture of Hospital Mobility.

ABSTRACT:

Background/objectives

To describe the Mobility Action Group (MACT), an innovative process to enhance implementation of hospital mobility programs and create a culture of mobility in acute care.

Design

Continuous quality improvement intervention with episodic data review.

Setting

Inpatient units including medical, surgical, and intensive care settings.

Participants

A total of 42 hospitals of varying sizes across the United States.

Interventions

The MACT and Change Package were developed to provide a conceptual framework, road map, and step-by-step guide to enable mobility teams to implement mobility programs successfully and meet their mobilization goals. Participants were encouraged to select two to three change tactics to pursue during the first action cycle and select and implement additional tactics in subsequent cycles. Nine learning sessions were held via webinar from April 27, 2017, to October 5, 2017, during which faculty provided brief presentations, facilitation, and group discussion.

Measurements

Implementation of programs, walks per day, use of bed and chair alarms, and participant satisfaction.

Results

Successful implementation of mobility programs was achieved at most (76%) sites. The proportion of patients who received at least three walks per day increased from 9% to 19%. The proportion of patients who were placed on a bed or chair alarm decreased from 36% to 20%. On average, 69% of participants reported they were "strongly satisfied" with the learning sessions. Most participants found the Change Package (58%) and Toolkit (63%) "very helpful." Since the conclusion of the active initiative, the Change Package has been downloaded 1,200 times. Of those who downloaded it, 48% utilized it to establish a mobility program, and 58% used it at their organization at least once a month.

Conclusion

The MACT and Change Package provides an innovative approach emphasizing systemwide change that can help catalyze a culture of mobility in hospitals across the nation, improving the quality of care for hospitalized older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:2373-2381, 2020.

SUBMITTER: Lorgunpai SJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7718401 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveDespite having a detailed MRI-safety questionnaire check at the point of referral, we have encountered a significant number of near-misses with patients being identified with MRI-Unsafe devices at the time of appointments, making this an important safety hazard.Methods and materialsA two-part survey was performed to assess referrer compliance of asking MRI-questionnaires. 120 outpatients across 3 MRI sites were interviewed at the time of appointment to confirm whether their referrers completed the MRI questionnaires with them at the time of referral.Location:Department of Radiology, Ninewells Hospital, Perth Royal Infirmary and Stracathro Hospital in Scotland.ResultsOnly 50-55 % of patients confirmed that they were asked about presence of a pacemaker at the point of referral. Less than 50 % of patients reported being asked about other potential hazards.Suggested strategies for change: (1) Risk Alert-Sent to all MRI referrers in the organization. ( 2) Changes to MRI Safety Questionnaire. (3) Feedback mechanism to referrers-NHS trust website publications on number of recorded near-misses and wasted appointments due to MRI-safety issues. (4) Compulsory education/training of future referrers (junior doctors/allied health professionals). (5) Education of patients/public on MRI safety-Displaying patient information leaflets/posters in waiting areas of the hospital.Key measures for improvement: (1) Reduction in number of recorded near-misses. (2) System improvements, referrer and patient education, reduction of wasted MRI appointments and improvement of waiting-times for MRI appointments Effects of survey and conclusions: The survey highlights the possibility of inadequate referrer attention, and poor patient communication about MRI safety questionnaire with regards to potential hazards of MRI examination in presence of undeclared implants. It initiated several interventions resulting in improved patient safety, with no events in next 12 months, whilst promoting public and referrer's understanding of potential MRI safety issues. Such actions are recommended for all NHS centres across UK since there are significant similarities in functioning across UK.

Project description:IntroductionHospital group models represent an organisational form that aims to bring together multiple provider organisations with a central headquarters and unified leadership responsible for locally managed operating units, standardised systems and a value-set shared across the group. These models seek to improve outcomes by reducing unwarranted variations in care provision and reducing costs through economies of scale. There is limited evidence on the impact and processes of implementing these models, so this study aims to evaluate one case study of a hospital group model.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a formative, mixed-methods evaluation using an embedded research approach to analyse the implementation of the model and its impact on outcomes and costs. We will carry out a multisited ethnography to analyse the programme theory for model design and implementation, the barriers and facilitators in the implementation; and wider contextual issues that influence implementation using semi-structured interviews (n=80), non-participant observations (n=80?hours), 'shadowing' (n=20?hours) and documentary analysis. We will also carry out an economic evaluation composed of a cost-consequence analysis and a return on investment analysis to evaluate the costs of creating and running the model and balance these against the potential cost-savings.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol was reviewed by the local R&D Office and University College London Ethics Committee and classified as a service evaluation, not requiring approval by a research ethics committee. We will follow guidelines for informed consent, confidentiality and information governance, and address issues of critical distance prevalent in embedded research. Findings will be shared at regular time points to inform the implementation of the model. The evaluation will also generate: an evaluation framework to evaluate future changes; recommendations for meaningful baseline data and measuring improvement; identification of implementation costs and potential cost-savings; and lessons for the National Health Service on implementing these models.