Dataset Information

Protocol for DRAUP: a deimplementation programme to decrease routine chest radiographs after central venous catheter insertion.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Avoiding low value medical practices is an important focus in current healthcare utilisation. Despite advantages of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) over chest X-ray including improved workflow and timeliness of results, POCUS-guided central venous catheter (CVC) position confirmation has slow rate of adoption. This demonstrates a gap that is ripe for the development of an intervention.

Methods

The intervention is a deimplementation programme called DRAUP (deimplementation of routine chest radiographs after adoption of ultrasound-guided insertion and confirmation of central venous catheter protocol) that will be created to address one unnecessary imaging modality in the acute care environment. We propose a three-phase approach to changing low-value practices. In phase 1, we will be guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research framework to explore barriers and facilitators of POCUS for CVC confirmation in a single centre, large tertiary, academic hospital via focus groups. The qualitative methods will inform the development and adaptation of strategies that address identified determinants of change. In phase 2, the multifaceted strategies will be conceptualised using Morgan's framework for understanding and reducing medical overuse. In phase 3, we will locally implement these strategies and assess them using Proctor's outcomes (adoption, deadoption, fidelity and penetration) in an observational study to demonstrate proof of concept, gaining valuable insights on the programme. Secondary outcomes will include POCUS-guided CVC confirmation efficacy measured by time and effectiveness measured by sensitivity and specificity of POCUS confirmation after CVC insertion.With limited data available to inform interventions that use concurrent implementation and deimplementation strategies to substitute chest X-ray for POCUS using the DRAUP programme, we propose that this primary implementation and secondary effectiveness pilot study will provide novel data that will expand the knowledge of implementation approaches to replacing low value or unnecessary care in acute care environments.

Ethics and dissemination

Approval of the study by the Human Research Protection Office has been obtained. This work will be disseminated by publication of peer-reviewed manuscripts, presentation in abstract form at scientific meetings and data sharing with other investigators through academically established means.

Trial registration number

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier, NCT04324762, registered on 27 March 2020.

SUBMITTER: Ablordeppey EA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8524291 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionCentral venous catheterization is a commonly performed procedure, accounting for approximately 8% of hospitalized patients. Based on the current literatures, the most acceptable site for central venous catheterization is inconclusive, considering various complications in hospitalized patients. Herein, we conducted a network meta-analysis to assess the clinically important complications among internal jugular, subclavian, femoral, and peripheral insertion.Materials and methodsThe Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Ichushi databases, Clinicaltrials.gov, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched. Studies including adults aged ≥ 18 years and randomized control trials that compared two different insertion sites (internal jugular, subclavian, femoral, and peripheral vein) were selected. The primary outcomes were clinically important infectious, thrombotic, and mechanical complications.ResultsAmong the 5,819 records initially identified, 13 trials (6,201 patients) were included for a network meta-analysis. For clinically important infectious complication, subclavian insertion decreased the complication risk, compared with internal jugular [risk ratio (RR), 0.30; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.11-0.81; moderate certainty], and femoral insertion increased than subclavian insertion (RR 2.56; 95% CI, 1.02-6.44; moderate certainty). Peripheral insertion was also significantly associated with a lower risk compared with internal jugular (RR 0.06; 95% CI, 0.01-0.32; low certainty); subclavian (RR 0.21; 95% CI, 0.05-0.77; moderate certainty); and femoral insertion (RR 0.08; 95% CI, 0.02-0.40; low certainty). For clinically important thrombotic complication, we did not find significant differences between insertion sites. For clinically important mechanical complication, femoral insertion decreased the complication risk, compared with internal jugular (RR 0.42; 95% CI, 0.21-0.82; moderate certainty) and subclavian insertion (RR 0.33; 95% CI, 0.16-0.66; moderate certainty). Peripheral insertion was also associated with the lower complication risk compared with internal jugular (RR 0.39; 95% CI, 0.18-0.85; low certainty) and subclavian insertion (RR 0.31; 95% CI, 0.13-0.75; moderate certainty).ConclusionThe insertion site of the central venous catheter, which is most likely to cause the fewest complications, should be selected. Our findings can provide the rationale for deciding the insertion site for a central venous catheter.Systematic review registration[www.protocols.io], identifier [61375].