RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Organizational context (eg, leadership) and facilitation (eg, coaching behaviors) are thought to interact and influence staff best practices in long-term care (LTC), including the management of delirium. Our objective was to assess if organizational context and facilitation-individually, and their interactions-were associated with delirium in LTC. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of secondary data. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We included 8755 residents from 281 care units in 86 LTC facilities in 3 Canadian provinces. METHODS: Delirium (present/absent) was assessed using the Resident Assessment Instrument-Minimum Data Set 2.0 (RAI-MDS 2.0). The Alberta Context Tool (ACT) measured 10 modifiable features of care unit organizational context. We measured the care unit's total care hours per resident day and the proportion of care hours that care aides contributed (staffing mix). Facilitation included the facility manager's perception of RAI-MDS reports' adequacy and pharmacist availability. We included unit managers' change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and an item reflecting how often care aides recommended policy changes. Associations of organizational context, facilitation, and their interactions with delirium were analyzed using mixed-effects logistic regressions, controlling for covariates. RESULTS: Delirium symptoms were prevalent in 17.4% of residents (n = 1527). Manager-perceived adequacy of RAI-MDS reports was linked to reduced delirium symptoms [odds ratio (OR) = 0.63]. Higher care hours per resident day (OR = 1.2) and an available pharmacist in the facility (OR = 1.5) were associated with increased delirium symptoms. ACT elements showed no direct association with delirium. However, on care units with low social capital scores (context), increased unit managers' OCB decreased delirium symptoms. On care units with high vs low evaluation scores (context), increased staffing mix reduces delirium symptoms more substantially. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Unit-level interactions between organizational context and facilitation call for targeted quality improvement interventions based on specific contextual factors, as effectiveness may vary across contexts.
Asunto(s)
Delirio , Cuidados a Largo Plazo , Humanos , Estudios Transversales , Estudios Retrospectivos , Masculino , Femenino , Anciano , Canadá , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Liderazgo , Casas de Salud , Cultura OrganizacionalRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The concept of value-based healthcare is being used worldwide to improve healthcare. The Intervention Selection Toolbox was developed to bridge the gap of value-based healthcare, between insights in outcomes and actual quality improvement initiatives. In this study we aimed to evaluate the use of the Intervention Selection Toolbox in daily practice of a quality improvement team in a hospital setting. METHODS: A methodological triangulation design was used. The Intervention Selection Toolbox was used by a multidisciplinary quality improvement team for colorectal cancer care in a large teaching hospital. In-depth semi-structured interviews, focusing on the key elements of process evaluation, were conducted after implementation with representatives of the quality improvement team to evaluate the use of the Intervention Selection Toolbox. Quantitative data regarding improvement initiatives and degree of implementation was also collected. RESULTS: The use of the Intervention Selection Toolbox initially resulted in 80 potential quality improvement initiatives. Eventually, two high potential improvement initiatives were selected. Some components of the toolbox were successfully implemented in daily practice, although 'standard monitoring' and 'causal chain analysis' proved more difficult to implement. Qualitative analysis was performed with ten members of the multidisciplinary team before thematic saturation occurred. Interviewed members had a wide range in characteristics: age 28-61 years, clinical experience 6-38 years and educational attainment from vocational program to academic doctorate. The Interviews showed added value in the use of the toolbox, but identified time and organizational management as restricting factors. CONCLUSIONS: The Intervention Selection Toolbox is useful to systematically identify improvement initiatives with impact on health outcomes that matter to patients. However, before implementation organizational structure should be optimized to maximize success and efficiency on integration of the Intervention Selection Toolbox.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Hospitales , Humanos , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Atención a la Salud , Neoplasias Colorrectales/cirugía , Mejoramiento de la CalidadRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: All studies classified as research involving human participants require research ethics review. Most regulation and guidance on ethical oversight of research involving human participants was written for pharmacotherapy interventions. Interpretation of such guidance for cluster-randomized trials and stepped-wedge trials, which commonly evaluate complex non-therapeutic interventions such as knowledge translation, public health, or health service delivery interventions, can pose challenges to researchers and regulators. CURRENT GUIDANCE: The Ottawa Statement on the Ethical Design and Conduct of Cluster-Randomized Trials provides guidance on the ethical oversight and consent procedures for cluster-randomized trials, and while not explicit, this includes stepped-wedge trials. Yet, stepped-wedge trials have unique characteristics that differentiate them from standard cluster-randomized trials. In particular, they can be used to evaluate knowledge translation interventions within the context of a routine health system rollout; they may have a non-randomized design; and the decision to implement the intervention is not always made by the researcher. Many stepped-wedge trials do not undergo ethical review and do not report trial registration. This suggests that those undertaking these studies and research ethics committees perceive them as non-research activities. RECOMMENDATIONS: Through an ethical analysis of two case studies, we argue that stepped-wedge trials, like parallel arm cluster trials, are systematic investigations designed to produce generalizable knowledge. We contend that stepped-wedge trials usually include human research participants, which may be patients, health care providers, or both. Stepped-wedge trials are therefore research involving human participants for the purpose of ethical review. Nevertheless, the use of a waiver or alteration of consent may be appropriate in many stepped-wedge trials due to the infeasibility of obtaining informed consent and the low-risk nature of the interventions. To ensure that traditional ethical principles such as respect for persons are upheld, these studies must undergo research ethics review.
Asunto(s)
Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto/ética , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto/métodos , Atención a la Salud , Revisión Ética , Investigación Biomédica/ética , Comités de Ética en Investigación , Ética en Investigación , Humanos , Consentimiento Informado , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto/ética , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto/métodos , InvestigadoresRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Each year, 2.2 million intrapartum-related deaths (intrapartum stillbirths and first day neonatal deaths) occur worldwide with 99% of them taking place in low- and middle-income countries. Despite the accelerated increase in the proportion of deliveries taking place in health facilities in these settings, the stillborn and neonatal mortality rates have not reduced proportionately. Poor quality of care in health facilities is attributed to two-thirds of these deaths. Improving quality of care during the intrapartum period needs investments in evidence-based interventions. We aim to evaluate the quality improvement package-Scaling Up Safer Bundle Through Quality Improvement in Nepal (SUSTAIN)-on intrapartum care and intrapartum-related mortality in public hospitals of Nepal. METHODS: We will conduct a stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial in eight public hospitals with each having least 3000 deliveries a year. Each hospital will represent a cluster with an intervention transition period of 2 months in each. With a level of significance of 95%, the statistical power of 90% and an intra-cluster correlation of 0.00015, a study period of 19 months should detect at least a 15% change in intrapartum-related mortality. Quality improvement training, mentoring, systematic feedback, and a continuous improvement cycle will be instituted based on bottleneck analyses in each hospital. All concerned health workers will be trained on standard basic neonatal resuscitation and essential newborn care. Portable fetal heart monitors (Moyo®) and neonatal heart rate monitors (Neobeat®) will be introduced in the hospitals to identify fetal distress during labor and to improve neonatal resuscitation. Independent research teams will collect data in each hospital on intervention inputs, processes, and outcomes by reviewing records and carrying out observations and interviews. The dose-response effect will be evaluated through process evaluations. DISCUSSION: With the global momentum to improve quality of intrapartum care, better understanding of QI package within a health facility context is important. The proposed package is based on experiences from a similar previous scale-up trial carried out in Nepal. The proposed evaluation will provide evidence on QI package and technology for implementation and scale up in similar settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN16741720 . Registered on 2 March 2019.
Asunto(s)
Hospitales Públicos/organización & administración , Paquetes de Atención al Paciente , Atención Perinatal/normas , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Países en Desarrollo , Femenino , Humanos , Lactante , Mortalidad Infantil , Recién Nacido , Mortalidad Materna , Monitoreo Fisiológico/normas , Nepal , Embarazo , Resucitación/normasRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Although there have been tremendous advances in diabetes care, including the development of efficacious interventions, there remain considerable challenges in translating these advances into practice. Four primary care networks (PCNs) in Alberta implemented 2 quality-improvement interventions focused on lifestyle and depression as part of the Alberta's Caring for Diabetes (ABCD) project. METHODS: We used the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation and maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to evaluate adoption of the quality-improvement interventions in the PCN setting. We undertook semistructured interviews with PCN staff (n=24); systematic documentation (e.g. field notes) and formal reflections by the research team (n=4). Content analysis was used to interrogate the data. RESULTS: The Ready? Set? Go! construct summarizes our findings well. We observed that the participating PCNs were in a favourable position to adopt the 2 interventions successfully. We implemented strategies to promote adoption (Ready), and respondents reported prioritization and willingness to initiate the interventions based on positive indicators (Set). Regardless, the interplay of organizational stability, leadership support, existing physician culture and organizational context influenced the overall degree of adoption of the interventions across the PCNs (Go). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that implementation of quality-improvement interventions into settings similar to the PCNs we studied will have the greatest likelihood of success when there is priority alignment, genuine and sustained leadership support and an innovative organizational culture. However, the stability of organizations may affect the degree to which staff can adopt quality-improvement interventions successfully, so organizational stability should be assessed on an ongoing basis.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus/terapia , Atención Primaria de Salud/organización & administración , Garantía de la Calidad de Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Mejoramiento de la Calidad/organización & administración , HumanosRESUMEN
This study evaluates how emergency department (ED) and medical intensive care unit (MICU) providers interact in the setting of a quality improvement project designed to enhance transport/care for patients from the ED to the MICU. Focus groups were conducted with nurses, residents, physician assistants, and physicians from the ED and MICU at baseline and 6 months regarding their thoughts on and perspectives of the intervention and working with colleagues from another department. Data were then analyzed utilizing a multistep coding scheme that identified key barriers to and facilitators of the interprofessional-interdepartmental intervention. Analysis also showed, however, that variances in departmental culture play a significant role in the willingness and ability of providers to practice interdepartmental team-based care. It is argued that anticipating and acknowledging these differences and designing systems to address them prior to launch will be essential to the development and implementation of effective interdepartmental quality improvement interventions.
Asunto(s)
Conducta Cooperativa , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Comunicación Interdisciplinaria , Cultura Organizacional , Femenino , Grupos Focales , Humanos , Masculino , Grupo de Atención al PacienteRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Health care-associated infections such as catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs) are prevalent in resource-limited settings. This study was carried out to determine whether a multifaceted intervention targeting health care personnel would reduce CAUTI rates in a public hospital located in a resource-limited setting. METHODS: A one group, pretest-posttest study was carried out from March to July 2012 in a public district hospital in Nairobi, Kenya. Patients admitted to adult medical wards, and who received urinary catheters, were evaluated for symptomatic CAUTIs using a modified definition by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. After collecting baseline CAUTI rates for 8 weeks, a multifaceted intervention consisting of lectures, reminder signs, and infection prevention rounds (week 9) was implemented. The postintervention rate of CAUTIs was measured over 7 subsequent weeks. Bivariable analysis was performed to determine whether the intervention was associated with reduced CAUTIs. RESULTS: A total of 125 patients received urinary catheters, with 82 preintervention and 43 postintervention. Mean duration of catheterization did not change between phases (6.9 vs 5.6 days, respectively, P = .322), but catheter utilization ratio decreased from 0.14 to 0.09 (P < .001). There were 13 preintervention CAUTIs (for 30.4 infections per 1,000 catheter-days) and no postintervention CAUTIs (P = .002). CONCLUSION: In this resource-limited setting, the baseline rate of CAUTIs was high. A low-cost, multifaceted intervention resulted in decreased urinary catheter use and CAUTI rates.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres/epidemiología , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres/prevención & control , Infección Hospitalaria/epidemiología , Infección Hospitalaria/prevención & control , Infecciones Urinarias/epidemiología , Infecciones Urinarias/prevención & control , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Terapia Conductista , Países en Desarrollo , Femenino , Personal de Salud , Hospitales Públicos , Humanos , Incidencia , Kenia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Growing consensus within the health care field suggests that context matters and needs more concerted study for helping those who implement and conduct research on quality improvement interventions. Health care delivery system decision makers require information about whether an intervention tested in one context will work in another with some differences from the original site. We aimed to define key terms, enumerate candidate domains for the study of context, provide examples from the pediatric quality improvement literature, and identify potential measures for selected contexts. Key sources include the organizational literature, broad evaluation frameworks, and a recent project in the patient safety area on context sensitivity. The article concludes with limitations and next steps for developments in this area.