Utilizing quality improvement methods to improve patient care outcomes in a pediatric residency program.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Akins RB
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2931256 | biostudies-other | 2009 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:Pediatric sepsis is a major public health problem. Published treatment guidelines and several initiatives have increased adherence with guideline recommendations and have improved patient outcomes, but the gains are modest, and persistent gaps remain. The Children's Hospital Association Improving Pediatric Sepsis Outcomes (IPSO) collaborative seeks to improve sepsis outcomes in pediatric emergency departments, ICUs, general care units, and hematology/oncology units. We developed a multicenter quality improvement learning collaborative of US children's hospitals. We reviewed treatment guidelines and literature through 2 in-person meetings and multiple conference calls. We defined and analyzed baseline sepsis-attributable mortality and hospital-onset sepsis and developed a key driver diagram (KDD) on the basis of treatment guidelines, available evidence, and expert opinion. Fifty-six hospital-based teams are participating in IPSO; 100% of teams are engaged in educational and information-sharing activities. A baseline, sepsis-attributable mortality of 3.1% was determined, and the incidence of hospital-onset sepsis was 1.3 cases per 1000 hospital admissions. A KDD was developed with the aim of reducing both the sepsis-attributable mortality and the incidence of hospital-onset sepsis in children by 25% from baseline by December 2020. To accomplish these aims, the KDD primary drivers focus on improving the following: treatment of infection; recognition, diagnosis, and treatment of sepsis; de-escalation of unnecessary care; engagement of patients and families; and methods to optimize performance. IPSO aims to improve sepsis outcomes through collaborative learning and reliable implementation of evidence-based interventions.
| S-EPMC7874527 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPhysicians and physicists are expected to contribute to patient safety and quality improvement (QI) in Radiation Oncology (RO), but prior studies suggest that training for this may be inadequate. RO and medical physics (MP) program directors (PDs) were surveyed to better understand the current patient safety/QI training in their residency programs.MethodsPDs were surveyed via email in January 2017. Survey questions inquired about current training, curriculum elements, and barriers to development and/or improvement of safety and QI training.ResultsEighty-nine RO PDs and 84 MP PDs were surveyed, and 21 RO PDs (28%) and 31 MP PDs (37%) responded. Both RO and MP PDs had favorable opinions of current safety and QI training, and used a range of resources for program development, especially safety and QI publications. Various curriculum elements were reported. Curriculum elements used by RO and MP PDs were similar, except RO were more likely than MP PDs to implement morbidity and mortality (M&M) conference (72% vs. 45%, p < 0.05). RO and MP PDs similarly cited various barriers, but RO PDs were more likely to cite lack of experience than MP PDs (40% vs. 16%, p < 0.05). PDs responded similarly independent of whether they reported using a departmental incident learning system (ILS) or not.ConclusionsPDs view patient safety/QI as an important part of resident education. Most PDs agreed that residents are adequately exposed to patient safety/QI and prepared to meet the patient safety/QI expectations of clinical practice. This conflicts with other independent studies that indicate a majority of residents feel their patient safety/QI training is inadequate and lacks formal exposure to QI tools.
| S-EPMC6154943 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Handoff is the process in which patient care is transitioned from one provider to another. In teaching hospitals, handoffs are frequent, and resident duty hour restrictions have increased the use of night float staff. To date, few studies have focused on long-term sustainability and effectiveness of a handoff quality improvement project. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our resident-driven quality improvement project was to evaluate the effectiveness and sustainability of a standardized template for handoff quality in a community hospital internal medicine program. METHODS: We used a multistep continuous quality improvement approach. Problems in the handoff process were identified through process mapping and anonymous needs assessment of the residents. A group of residents and faculty identified problems during biweekly discussions, created a standardized template, and adopted a new handoff process. We audited handoffs and surveyed residents at 3 and 9 months after implementation to assess effectiveness and sustainability. RESULTS: Before the intervention, only 40% of residents reported regular morning handoff. Using the standardized template, statistically significant, sustained improvements were seen in morning handoff frequency (59% preintervention, 90% at 3 months, 89% at 9 months), along with decreases in unreported overnight events (84% preintervention, 58% at 3 months, 50% at 9 months) and uncertainty about decisions because of poor handoffs (72% preintervention, 49% at 3 months, 37% at 9 months). Statistically significant decreases in missed content (69%-46%) and copy-and-paste behavior (78%-38%) at 3 months were not sustained. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated sustained improvements in unreported events and uncertainty caused by poor handoffs. Initial improvements in missed content and copy-and-paste behavior that were not sustained suggest a need for ongoing reinforcement and monitoring of handoff quality.
| S-EPMC3693699 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectivesAssess patient outcomes in patients with suspected infection and the cost-effectiveness of implementing a quality improvement program.Design, setting, and participantsWe conducted an observational single-center study of 13,877 adults with suspected infection between March 1, 2014, and July 31, 2017. The 18-month period before and after the effective date for mandated reporting of the sepsis bundle was examined. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score and culture and antibiotic orders were used to identify patients meeting Sepsis-3 criteria from the electronic health record.InterventionsThe following interventions were performed as follows: 1) multidisciplinary sepsis committee with sepsis coordinator and data abstractor; 2) education campaign; 3) electronic health record tools; and 4) a Modified Early Warning System.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary health outcomes were in-hospital death and length of stay. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated and the empirical 95% CI for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was estimated from 5,000 bootstrap samples.ResultsIn multivariable analysis, the odds ratio for in-hospital death in the post- versus pre-implementation periods was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.57-0.86) in those with suspected infection, and the hazard ratio for time to discharge was 1.25 (95% CI, 1.20-1.29). Similarly, a decrease in the odds for in-hospital death and an increase in the speed to discharge was observed for the subset that met Sepsis-3 criteria. The program was cost saving in patients with suspected infection (-$272,645.7; 95% CI, -$757,970.3 to -$79,667.7). Cost savings were also observed in the Sepsis-3 group.Conclusions and relevanceOur health system's program designed to adhere to the sepsis bundle metrics led to decreased mortality and length of stay in a cost-effective manner in a much larger catchment than just the cohort meeting the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services measures. Our single-center model of interventions may serve as a practice-based benchmark for hospitalized patients with suspected infection.
| S-EPMC7195842 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10715786 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDespite the Clinical Learning Environment Review's recommendations of their use, patient safety event reporting systems are underutilized by residents.ObjectiveWe aimed to identify perceived barriers to event reporting amongst internal medicine residents and implement a targeted quality improvement initiative to address the identified barriers and increase overall resident event report rates.MethodsA total of 94 Internal Medicine (IM) residents participated in the educational intervention in 2018. We measured residents' perception of barriers to event reporting and employed the results of the questionnaire to create a skill-based educational workshop. We conducted the plan-do-study-act model to test a structured educational intervention and its effectiveness on pre-post IM residents' event report rates and compared it to report rates of Non-Internal Medicine (Non-IM) residents. Additionally, we assessed pre-post intervention knowledge, skills, and attitudes in event reporting.Results94/94 (100%) of IM residents had a significantly higher median percent of patient safety event reporting when compared to pre-intervention (23.6% compared to 5.88%, p-value = 0.0030) and when compared to Non-IM residents (23.6% compared to 5.31%, p-value = 0.0002). Residents performed better on the post-test compared to the pre-test (90% compared to 30%, p-value = 0.0001) for knowledge. 100% of the critical action items were completed and 90% of participants reported their perception of the event reporting process improved.ConclusionsBy elucidating common reasons why residents are not reporting patient safety events, a specific intervention can be created to target the identified impediments and improve resident event reporting.AbbreviationsIM: Internal Medicine IM; Non-IM: Non-Internal Medicine; IOM: Institute of Medicine I; ACGME CLER: Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Clinical Learning Environment Review; GME: Graduate Medical Education; IRB: Institutional Review Board; PDSA: Plan, Do, Study, Act.
| S-EPMC7425618 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Pediatric residents report a lack of confidence and competence with procedural skills at graduation. Training programs could benefit from improved approaches to target these needs. Using the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) Model for Improvement and three Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles, we examined the impact of a procedure simulation boot camp on self-reported procedural confidence and competence as well as the longitudinal impacts of these sequential interventions on Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Graduating Resident Survey (GRS) results.Three rapid cycle interventions were performed in successive academic years. The interventions included 1) increased awareness of available procedural experiences, 2) institution of procedural educational conferences, and 3) implementation of a senior resident procedure boot camp. Senior resident self-reported procedural confidence was measured before and after the boot camp. Procedural competence was measured using the ACGME GRS. Results: Thirty-two of 34 senior residents (94%) completed the 2016 ACGME GRS, similar to the response rates of 2014 (92%) and 2015 (94%), and 30 of 34 third-year residents participated in the procedure boot camp (88%). Resident confidence and competence with procedural skills improved after the institution of the quality improvement intervention. ACGME GRS-reported competency increased in bag and mask ventilation (77% to 94%), neonatal endotracheal intubation (39% to 69%), peripheral IV placement (10% to 50%), and umbilical catheter placement (35% to 53%).A quality improvement intervention with three rapid PDSA cycles was successful in improving senior pediatric resident confidence and competence with ACGME required procedural skills.
| S-EPMC5493469 | biostudies-other
Project description:Introduction:The Residency Match is becoming more competitive each year, and more than ever, medical students must prove themselves in the residency interview. Data from the 2018 National Residency Matching Program's Program Director Survey highlight the importance of the interview on Match performance. We developed a residency interview training program with the goal of preparing medical students for residency interviews, and we assessed the impact of the training on medical student confidence. Methods:Our residency interview training program includes (1) a short didactic session on the residency interview process, (2) an informational packet with commonly asked questions, (3) two 20-minute practice (mock) interviews, (4) 10 minutes of face-to-face feedback from interviewers, (5) a facilitated group debriefing, and (6) access to a participant's two videotaped interviews and a guided self-assessment. To evaluate the effectiveness of our program, we assessed student confidence with a pre- and postsurvey. Results:We have been running our residency interview training program since 2014. Over the last 5 years, 73 fourth-year medical students have participated. When polled after completing their first authentic residency interview, students felt they had more knowledge of the interview process, better preparation, and more confidence in their skills to interview successfully; they also believed that the program improved their interview performance. Discussion:Performance during the residency interview is the most important factor used by residency programs to rank applicants. Using our residency interview training program, medical students can improve their confidence prior to interviews.
| S-EPMC7373200 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionResidents play a key role in patient care at academic medical centers and have unique insights into safety improvement opportunities. At our institution, <1% of safety events were reported by resident trainees. The primary objective of this quality improvement (QI) initiative was to increase the monthly incidence of event reporting by pediatric residents by 20% from baseline within 12 months.MethodsA QI team used the model for improvement to identify barriers to submitting safety event reports. The team used multiple intervention cycles to increase knowledge and promote engagement in event reporting. Interventions included educational tip sheets, a hospital-wide Morbidity and Mortality (M&M) conference, peer recognition and acknowledgment by senior leadership for report submission, and an interactive reporting activity. The outcome measure was monthly number of reports filed by residents. The process measure was the number of unique residents submitting a report each month. Time to complete a report was a balancing measure.ResultsThe number of reports placed by residents increased significantly, with a centerline shift from 15 to 29 reports per month (statistical process control chart-Fig. 3). The number of unique residents submitting reports increased from 10 to 22 per month. The time to complete a report was unchanged.ConclusionsEngaging residents in patient safety initiatives through education, experiential learning, and recognition can increase safety event reporting by residents. Future planned interventions include enhancing safety event reporting technology, developing patient safety faculty and resident champions, and increasing transparency regarding outcomes of safety event reports.
| S-EPMC8782116 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo describe and assess the effectiveness of a formal scholarly activity program for a highly integrated adult and pediatric neurology residency program.MethodsStarting in 2011, all graduating residents were required to complete at least one form of scholarly activity broadly defined to include peer-reviewed publications or presentations at scientific meetings of formally mentored projects. The scholarly activity program was administered by the associate residency training director and included an expanded journal club, guided mentorship, a required grand rounds platform presentation, and annual awards for the most scholarly and seminal research findings. We compared scholarly output and mentorship for residents graduating within a 5-year period following program initiation (2011-2015) and during the preceding 5-year preprogram baseline period (2005-2009).ResultsParticipation in scholarship increased from the preprogram baseline (24 of 53 graduating residents, 45.3%) to the postprogram period (47 of 57 graduating residents, 82.1%, p < 0.0001). Total scholarly output more than doubled from 49 activities preprogram (0.92/resident) to 139 postprogram (2.44/resident, p = 0.0002). The proportions of resident participation increased for case reports (20.8% vs 66.7%, p < 0.0001) and clinical research (17.0% vs 38.6%, p = 0.012), but were similar for laboratory research and topical reviews. The mean activities per resident increased for published abstracts (0.15 ± 0.41 to 1.26 ± 1.41, p < 0.0001), manuscripts (0.75 ± 1.37 to 1.00 ± 1.40, p = 0.36), and book chapters (0.02 ± 0.14 to 0.18 ± 0.60, p = 0.07). Rates of resident participation as first authors increased from 30.2% to 71.9% (p < 0.0001). The number of individual faculty mentors increased from 36 (preprogram) to 44 (postprogram).ConclusionsOur multifaceted program, designed to enhance resident and faculty engagement in scholarship, was associated with increased academic output and an expanded mentorship pool. The program was particularly effective at encouraging presentations at scientific meetings. Longitudinal analysis will determine whether such a program portfolio inspires an increase in academic careers involving neuroscience-oriented research.
| S-EPMC5379930 | biostudies-literature