Article

Rebound in ventilator-associated pneumonia rates during a prevention checklist washout period.

Paediatric Intensive Care Unit, Paediatric Critical Care Medicine and Paediatric Palliative Care Service, University of Michigan Medical Center, Mott Children's Hospital, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-0243, USA.
BMJ quality & safety (Impact Factor: 3.28). 06/2011; 20(9):811-7. DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs.2011.051243
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To describe the washout effect after stopping a prevention checklist for ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). METHODS VAP rates were prospectively monitored for special cause variation over 42&emsp14;months in a paediatric intensive care unit. A VAP prevention bundle was implemented, consisting of head of bed elevation, oral care, suctioning device management, ventilator tubing care, and standard infection control precautions. Key practices of the bundle were implemented with a checklist and subsequently incorporated into the nursing and respiratory care bedside flow sheets to achieve long-term sustainability. Compliance with the VAP bundle was monitored throughout. The timeline for the project was retrospectively categorised into the benchmark phase, the checklist phase (implementation), the checklist washout phase, and the flowsheet phase (cues in the flowsheet). RESULTS During the checklist phase (12&emsp14;months), VAP bundle compliance rose from <50% to >75% and the VAP rate fell from 4.2 to 0.7 infections per 1000 ventilator days (p<0.059). Unsolicited qualitative feedback from frontline staff described overburdensome documentation requirements, form fatigue, and checklist burnout. During the checklist washout phase (4&emsp14;months), VAP rates rose to 4.8 infections per 1000 ventilator days (p<0.042). In the flowsheet phase, the VAP rate dropped to 0.8 infections per 1000 ventilator days (p<0.047). CONCLUSIONS Salient cues to drive provider behaviour towards best practice are helpful to sustain process improvement, and cessation of such cues should be approached warily. Initial education, year-long habit formation, and effective early implementation demonstrated no appreciable effect on the VAP rate during the checklist washout period.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Matthew F Niedner, Jun 19, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
220 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: As quality measures increasingly become tied to payment, evaluating the most effective ways to provide high-quality care becomes more important.
    08/2014; 149(10). DOI:10.1001/jamasurg.2014.1627
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background How compliance with a ventilator bundle is monitored varies from institution to institution. Some institutions rely on the primary intensive care unit team to review the bundle during their rounds; others rely on a separate team of health care personnel that may include representatives from disciplines such as nursing, respiratory therapy, and pharmacy. Objectives To compare rates of compliance with ventilator bundle components between a dedicated ventilator bundle rounding team and the primary intensive care unit rounding team in a 68-bed medical intensive care unit. Methods A query of the medical intensive care unit's database was used to retrospectively determine rates of compliance with specific ventilator bundle components at a tertiary care hospital in an urban community for 1 year. Results Compared with the intensive care unit rounding team, the ventilator bundle rounding team had better compliance with sedation vacation (61.7% vs 54.0%, P < .001). Rates of compliance with spontaneous breathing trials and prophylaxis of peptic ulcer disease were similar in both study groups. Conclusions A dedicated ventilator bundle rounding team improves compliance with sedation vacation, but not with spontaneous breathing trials and prophylaxis of peptic ulcer disease. In a large-volume tertiary center, a dedicated ventilator bundle rounding team may be more effective than the primary rounding team in achieving compliance with some bundle components.
    American Journal of Critical Care 01/2013; 22(1):54-60. DOI:10.4037/ajcc2013873 · 1.60 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In the care of patients, the prevention of nosocomial infections is crucial. For it to be successful, cross-sectoral, interface-oriented hygiene quality management is necessary. The goal is to apply the HACCP (Hazard Assessment and Critical Control Points) concept to hospital hygiene, in order to create a multi-dimensional hygiene control system based on hygiene indicators that will overcome the limitations of a procedurally non-integrated and non-cross-sectoral view of hygiene. Three critical risk dimensions can be identified for the implementation of three-dimensional quality control of hygiene in clinical routine: the constitution of the person concerned, the surrounding physical structures and technical equipment, and the medical procedures. In these dimensions, the establishment of indicators and threshold values enables a comprehensive assessment of hygiene quality. Thus, the cross-sectoral evaluation of the quality of structure, processes and results is decisive for the success of integrated infection prophylaxis. This study lays the foundation for hygiene indicator requirements and develops initial concepts for evaluating quality management in hygiene.
    04/2012; 7(1):Doc15. DOI:10.3205/dgkh000199