Dataset Information

Evaluation of the implementation of a quality improvement program through morbidity and mortality reviews in a developing country.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Morbidity and mortality reviews represent an opportunity to discuss adverse events and healthcare issues. Aim: Report the first experience of implementing a procedure of MMR, and assess its impact on quality improvement.

Methods

From July 2019 to December 2019, members of the surgical and ICU departments designed and implemented a regular procedure of MMR. Cases of severe postoperative complications after curative resection for digestive cancer were selected to be presented by a surgical resident and discussed in an interdisciplinary conference following a standardized presentation based on an analysis tool adapted from the ALARM framework. Process was assessed by the number of MMRs held, number and type of recommendations issued and implemented.

Results

Among 13 serious complications during the study period, 10 were discussed. The "Tasks" category was activated in 90% of the cases where lack or misuse of protocols was identified in 90% of the events discussed. Test results availability or accuracy were incarnated in 30% of cases. Poor communication was a contributing factor in 60% of the cases. Written medical records were defective in 40% of the cases. From 16 recommendations for improvement emitted, 87.5% (14/16) were translated into projects and successfully implemented.

Conclusions

a standardized and regular procedure of morbidity and mortality reviews in a tertiary care facility in a developing country allowed a significant improvement in patient care through quality initiatives implementation. MMRs might be a strong tool for the improvement of surgical care particularly for low-mid income countries.

SUBMITTER: Lahnaoui O

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9287764 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluation of the implementation of a quality improvement program through morbidity and mortality reviews in a developing country.

Lahnaoui Oumayma O Souadka Amine A El Ahmadi Brahim B Ghannam Abdelilah A Belkhadir Zakaria Z Amrani Laila L Benkabbou Amine A Mohsine Raouf R Majbar Mohammed Anass MA

Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) 20220624

<h4>Background</h4>Morbidity and mortality reviews represent an opportunity to discuss adverse events and healthcare issues. Aim: Report the first experience of implementing a procedure of MMR, and assess its impact on quality improvement.<h4>Methods</h4>From July 2019 to December 2019, members of the surgical and ICU departments designed and implemented a regular procedure of MMR. Cases of severe postoperative complications after curative resection for digestive cancer were selected to be prese ...[more]

PMID: 35855883

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWith the use of medicines being a broad and extensive part of health management, mechanisms to ensure quality use of medicines are essential. Drug usage evaluation (DUE) is an evidence-based quality improvement methodology, designed to improve the quality, safety and cost-effectiveness of drug use. The purpose of this paper is to describe a national DUE methodology used to improve health care delivery across the continuum through multi-faceted intervention involving audit and feedback, academic detailing and system change, and a qualitative assessment of the methodology, as illustrated by the Acute Postoperative Pain Management (APOP) project.MethodsAn established methodology, consisting of a baseline audit of inpatient medical records, structured patient interviews and general practitioner surveys, followed by an educational intervention and follow-up audit, is used. Australian hospitals, including private, public, metropolitan and regional, are invited to participate on a voluntary basis. De-identified data collected by hospitals are collated and evaluated nationally to provide descriptive comparative analyses. Hospitals benchmark their practices against state and national results to facilitate change. The educational intervention consists of academic detailing, group education, audit and feedback, point-of-prescribing prompts and system changes. A repeat data collection is undertaken to assess changes in practice.An online qualitative survey was undertaken to evaluate the APOP program. Qualitative assessment of hospitals' perceptions of the effectiveness of the overall DUE methodology and changes in procedure/prescribing/policy/clinical practice which resulted from participation were elicited.Results62 hospitals participated in the APOP project. Among 23 respondents to the evaluation survey, 18 (78%) reported improvements in the documentation of pain scores at their hospital. 15 (65%) strongly agreed or agreed that participation in APOP directly resulted in increased prescribing of multimodal analgesia for pain relief in postoperative patients.ConclusionsThis national DUE program has facilitated the engagement and participation of a number of acute health care facilities to address issues relating to quality use of medicine. This approach has been perceived to be effective in helping them achieve improvements in patient care.

Project description:ObjectiveTrauma is a leading cause of mortality and morbidity globally, disproportionately affecting low/middle-income countries (LMICs). Understanding the factors determining implementation success for in-hospital Trauma Quality Improvement Programs (TQIPs) is critical to reducing the global trauma burden. We synthesised topical literature to identify key facilitators and barriers to in-hospital TQIP implementation across country income levels.DesignScoping review.Data sourcesPubMed, Web of Science and Global Index Medicus databases were searched from June 2009 to January 2022.Eligibility criteriaPublished literature involving any study design, written in English and evaluating any implemented in-hospital quality improvement programme in trauma populations worldwide. Literature that was non-English, unpublished and involved non-hospital TQIPs was excluded.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers completed a three-stage screening process using Covidence, with any discrepancies resolved through a third reviewer. Content analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research identified facilitator and barrier themes for in-hospital TQIP implementation.ResultsTwenty-eight studies met the eligibility criteria from 3923 studies identified. The most discussed in-hospital TQIPs in included literature were trauma registries. Facilitators and barriers were similar across all country income levels. The main facilitator themes identified were the prioritisation of staff education and training, strengthening stakeholder dialogue and providing standardised best-practice guidelines. The key barrier theme identified in LMICs was poor data quality, while high-income countries (HICs) had reduced communication across professional hierarchies.ConclusionsStakeholder prioritisation of in-hospital TQIPs, along with increased knowledge and consensus of trauma care best practices, are essential efforts to reduce the global trauma burden. The primary focus of future studies on in-hospital TQIPs in LMICs should target improving registry data quality, while interventions in HICs should target strengthening communication channels between healthcare professionals.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Morbidity and mortality (M&M) conferences provide a forum for discussing adverse events and systems-based practice (SBP) issues; however, few models for implementing multidisciplinary, systems-focused M&M conferences exist. OBJECTIVE: To implement a new systems-focused M&M conference and evaluate success in focusing on adverse events and systems issues in a nonpunitive, multidisciplinary manner. METHODS: We implemented a new M&M conference into our large university-based internal medicine residency program. Using content analysis, we qualitatively analyzed audio recordings of M&M conferences from the first year of implementation (2010-2011) to determine the frequency of adverse events (injury resulting from medical care), SBP discussion, and allocation of blame. Multidisciplinary attendance was evaluated by attendance logs. Surveys assessed change in interns' perceptions of M&M conferences before and after the conference series (measured by median Likert-scale response) and trainee/faculty attitudes regarding the goal of M&M conferences. RESULTS: There were 226 attendees (66 faculty, 160 residents/fellows) at 9 M&M conferences. Average attendance per conference was 71, with representation from 16 disciplines. All M&M conferences (100%) included adverse events, SBP discussion, and lacked explicit individual blame. Interns' perceptions improved, including their belief that the M&M conference's purpose is systems improvement (4.35 versus 4.71, P = .02) and complications are discussed without blame (3.81 versus 4.34, P = .01). After experiencing M&M conferences, trainees/faculty reported favorable ratings, including beliefs that the M&M conference is important for education (97%) and the purpose is systems improvement (95%). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a new systems-focused M&M conference resulted in a conference series focusing on adverse events and associated system issues in a nonpunitive, multidisciplinary context.

Project description:BackgroundHundreds of nursing professionals graduate each year from Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) programs, entrusted with roles as practice scholars and leaders. Graduates are tasked to lead multidisciplinary knowledge implementation projects to improve safety, quality, and key performance metrics. Nevertheless, there is a continued lack of agreement and faculty dissatisfaction with the format, focus, and results of the DNP graduation projects. The use of a wide range of models and methodologies from different sciences for knowledge implementation introduces challenges to DNP students; affects the scientific rigor of the projects; and results in the overuse, superficial use, or misuse of the models. Quality improvement (QI) and program evaluation studies are substantial investments that may lead to waste and even harm if not well conducted. Traditional QI methodologies, commonly used in DNP projects, were found to be uncertain in improving health care outcomes. The complexity of health care systems calls for cross-fertilization between improvement and implementation sciences to improve health care outcomes.ObjectiveThis study describes the development, implementation, and evaluation of a hybrid model for QI and program evaluation studies to guide scholarship in the DNP program.MethodsThe hybrid model was based on cross-fertilization between improvement and implementation sciences. The model adapted the Getting to Outcome (GTO) and Knowledge to Action (KTA) models as the overarching process models for knowledge implementation. Within each phase of the GTO and KTA models, expected barriers and facilitators for the implementation and adoption of innovation were identified based on the CFIR (Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research). Accordingly, strategies to facilitate the implementation and adoption of innovations were identified based on a refined list of implementation strategies and QI tools. The choice of these models was based on the top 5 criteria for selecting implementation science theories and frameworks. Seven DNP students used the hybrid model to conduct QI projects. Students evaluated their experiences by responding to a Qualtrics survey.ResultsThe hybrid model encouraged a comprehensive systematic way of thinking, provided tools essential to implementation success, emphasized the need for adaptability in implementation, maintained rigor in QI, and guided the sustainability of change initiatives. Some of the challenges faced by students included finding reliable and valid measures, attaining and maintaining staff buy-in, and competing organizational priorities.ConclusionsCross-fertilization between improvement and implementation sciences provided a roadmap and systematic thinking for successful QI projects in the DNP program. The integration of the CFIR with the GTO or KTA process models, enforced by the use of evidence-based implementation strategies and QI tools, reflected the complexity of health care systems and emphasized the need for adaptability in implementation.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR1-10.2196/54213.

Project description:BackgroundHyponatremia and hypernatremia, as conventionally defined (<135 mEq/L and >145 mEq/L, respectively), are associated with increased perioperative morbidity and mortality. However, the effects of subtle deviations in serum sodium concentration within the normal range are not well-characterized.ObjectiveThe purpose of this analysis is to determine the association between borderline hyponatremia (135-137 mEq/L) and hypernatremia (143-145 mEq/L) on perioperative morbidity and mortality.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was performed using data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. This database is a repository of surgical outcome data collected from over 600 hospitals across the United States. The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried to extract all patients undergoing elective, noncardiac surgery from 2015 to 2019. The primary predictor variable was preoperative serum sodium concentration, measured less than 5 days before the index surgery. The 2 primary outcomes were the odds of morbidity and mortality occurring within 30 days of surgery. The risk of both outcomes in relation to preoperative serum sodium concentration was modeled using weighted generalized additive models to minimize the effect of selection bias while controlling for covariates.ResultsIn the overall cohort, 1,003,956 of 4,551,726 available patients had a serum sodium concentration drawn within 5 days of their index surgery. The odds of morbidity and mortality across sodium levels of 130-150 mEq/L relative to a sodium level of 140 mEq/L followed a nonnormally distributed U-shaped curve. The mean serum sodium concentration in the study population was 139 mEq/L. All continuous covariates were significantly associated with both morbidity and mortality (P<.001). Preoperative serum sodium concentrations of less than 139 mEq/L and those greater than 144 mEq/L were independently associated with increased morbidity probabilities. Serum sodium concentrations of less than 138 mEq/L and those greater than 142 mEq/L were associated with increased mortality probabilities. Hypernatremia was associated with higher odds of both morbidity and mortality than corresponding degrees of hyponatremia.ConclusionsAmong patients undergoing elective, noncardiac surgery, this retrospective analysis found that preoperative serum sodium levels less than 138 mEq/L and those greater than 142 mEq/L are associated with increased morbidity and mortality, even within currently accepted "normal" ranges. The retrospective nature of this investigation limits the ability to make causal determinations for these findings. Given the U-shaped distribution of risk, past investigations that assume a linear relationship between serum sodium concentration and surgical outcomes may need to be revisited. Likewise, these results question the current definition of perioperative eunatremia, which may require future prospective investigations.

Dataset Information

Evaluation of the implementation of a quality improvement program through morbidity and mortality reviews in a developing country.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Evaluation of the implementation of a quality improvement program through morbidity and mortality reviews in a developing country.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets