RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the extent to which intensive care units participating in the initial Keystone ICU project sustained reductions in rates of catheter related bloodstream infections. Design Collaborative cohort study to implement and evaluate interventions to improve patients' safety. SETTING: Intensive care units predominantly in Michigan, USA. INTERVENTION: Conceptual model aimed at improving clinicians' use of five evidence based recommendations to reduce rates of catheter related bloodstream infections rates, with measurement and feedback of infection rates. During the sustainability period, intensive care unit teams were instructed to integrate this intervention into staff orientation, collect monthly data from hospital infection control staff, and report infection rates to appropriate stakeholders. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Quarterly rate of catheter related bloodstream infections per 1000 catheter days during the sustainability period (19-36 months after implementation of the intervention). RESULTS: Ninety (87%) of the original 103 intensive care units participated, reporting 1532 intensive care unit months of data and 300 310 catheter days during the sustainability period. The mean and median rates of catheter related bloodstream infection decreased from 7.7 and 2.7 (interquartile range 0.6-4.8) at baseline to 1.3 and 0 (0-2.4) at 16-18 months and to 1.1 and 0 (0.0-1.2) at 34-36 months post-implementation. Multilevel regression analysis showed that incidence rate ratios decreased from 0.68 (95% confidence interval 0.53 to 0.88) at 0-3 months to 0.38 (0.26 to 0.56) at 16-18 months and 0.34 (0.24-0.48) at 34-36 months post-implementation. During the sustainability period, the mean bloodstream infection rate did not significantly change from the initial 18 month post-implementation period (-1%, 95% confidence interval -9% to 7%). CONCLUSIONS: The reduced rates of catheter related bloodstream infection achieved in the initial 18 month post-implementation period were sustained for an additional 18 months as participating intensive care units integrated the intervention into practice. Broad use of this intervention with achievement of similar results could substantially reduce the morbidity and costs associated with catheter related bloodstream infections.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres/prevención & control , Control de Infecciones/métodos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Humanos , MichiganRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The results of many quality improvement (QI) projects are gaining wide-spread attention. Policy-makers, hospital leaders and clinicians make important decisions based on the assumption that QI project results are accurate. However, compared with clinical research, QI projects are typically conducted with substantially fewer resources, potentially impacting data quality. Our objective was to provide a primer on basic data quality control methods appropriate for QI efforts. METHODS: Data quality control methods should be applied throughout all phases of a QI project. In the design phase, project aims should guide data collection decisions, emphasizing quality (rather than quantity) of data and considering resource limitations. In the data collection phase, standardized data collection forms, comprehensive staff training and a well-designed database can help maximize the quality of the data. Clearly defined data elements, quality assurance reviews of both collection and entry and system-based controls reduce the likelihood of error. In the data management phase, missing data should be quickly identified and corrected with system-based controls to minimize the missing data. Finally, in the data analysis phase, appropriate statistical methods and sensitivity analysis aid in managing and understanding the effects of missing data and outliers, in addressing potential confounders and in conveying the precision of results. CONCLUSION: Data quality control is essential to ensure the integrity of results from QI projects. Feasible methods are available and important to help ensure that stakeholder's decisions are based on accurate data.
Asunto(s)
Recolección de Datos/normas , Garantía de la Calidad de Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Gestión de la Calidad Total/organización & administración , Cateterismo/efectos adversos , Infección Hospitalaria/sangre , Infección Hospitalaria/epidemiología , Humanos , Errores Médicos/prevención & control , Michigan/epidemiología , Estudios de Casos Organizacionales , Administración de la SeguridadRESUMEN
PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to determine if patient safety incidents and the system-related factors contributing to them systematically differ for medical versus surgical patients in intensive care units. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a multicenter prospective study of 646 incidents involving adult medical patients and 707 incidents involving adult surgical patients that were reported to an anonymous patient safety registry over a 2-year period. We compared incident characteristics, patient harm, and associated system factors for medical versus surgical patients. RESULTS: The proportion of safety incidents reported for medical versus surgical patients differed for only 3 of 11 categories: equipment/devices (14% vs 19%; P = .02), "line, tube, or drain" events (8% vs 13%; P = .001), and computerized physician order entry (13% vs 6%; P < or = .001). The type of patient harm associated with incidents also did not differ. System factors were similar for medical versus surgical patients, with training and teamwork being the most important factors in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Medical and surgical patients in the intensive care unit experience very similar types of safety incidents with similar associated patient harm and system factors. Common initiatives to improve patient safety for medical and surgical patients should be undertaken with a specific focus on improving training and teamwork among the intensive care team.
Asunto(s)
Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Errores Médicos/prevención & control , Errores Médicos/estadística & datos numéricos , Gestión de Riesgos/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Anciano , Falla de Equipo/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Enfermedad Iatrogénica/epidemiología , Enfermedad Iatrogénica/prevención & control , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Análisis Multivariante , Cuidados Posoperatorios , Estudios Prospectivos , Vigilancia de Guardia , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the system factors related to "line, tube, and drain" (LTD) incidents in the intensive care unit (ICU). DESIGN: Voluntary, anonymous Web-based patient safety reporting system. SETTING: Eighteen ICUs in the United States. PATIENTS: Incidents reported by ICU staff members during a 12-month period ending June 2003. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: Characteristics of the incidents (defined as events that could/did cause harm), patients, and patient harm were described. Separate multivariable logistic regression analyses of contributing, limiting, and preventive system factors for LTD vs. non-LTD incidents were reported. MAIN RESULTS: Of the 114 reported LTD incidents, >60% were considered preventable. One patient death was attributed to an LTD incident. Of patients experiencing LTD incidents, 56% sustained physical injury, and 23% had an anticipated increased hospital stay. Factors contributing to LTD incidents included occurrence in the operating room (odds ratio [OR], 3.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25-9.83), occurrence on a holiday (OR, 3.65; 95% CI, 1.12-11.9), patient medical complexity (OR, 3.68; 95% CI, 2.28-5.92), and age of 1-9 yrs (OR, 7.95; 95% CI, 3.29-19.2). Factors related to team communication were less likely to limit LTD incidents (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.11-0.68), while clinician knowledge and skills helped prevent LTD incidents (OR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.09-2.97). CONCLUSIONS: Patients are harmed by preventable LTD incidents. Relative to non-LTD events, these incidents occur more frequently during holidays and in medically complex patients and children. Focusing on these contributing factors and clinician knowledge and skills is important for reducing and preventing these hazardous events.