Use of corporate Six Sigma performance-improvement strategies to reduce incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infections in a surgical ICU.
ABSTRACT Corporate performance-improvement methodologies can outperform traditional ones in addressing ICU-based adverse events. My colleagues and I used Six Sigma methodology to address our catheter-related bloodstream infection (CR-BSI) rate, which considerably exceeded the nationally established median over a 9-year period. We hypothesized that use of Six Sigma methodology would result in a substantial and sustainable decrease in our CR-BSI rate.
All patients were directly cared for by a geographically localized surgical ICU team in an academic tertiary referral center. CR-BSIs were identified by infection control staff using CDC definitions. Personnel trained in Six Sigma techniques facilitated performance-improvement efforts. Interventions included barrier precaution kits, new policies for catheter changes over guide wires, adoption of a new site-preparation antiseptic, direct attending supervision of catheter insertions, video training for housestaff, and increased frequency of dressing changes. After additional data analysis, chlorhexidine-silver catheters were used selectively in high-risk patients. The impact of interventions was assessed by monitoring the number of catheters placed between CR-BSIs.
Before the intervention period, 27 catheters were placed, on average, between individual CR-BSIs, a CR-BSI rate of 11 per 1,000 catheter days. After all operations were implemented, 175 catheters were placed between line infections, and average CR-BSI rate of 1.7/1,000 catheter days, a 650% improvement (p < 0.0001). Compared with historic controls, adoption of chlorhexidine-silver catheters in high-risk patients had a considerable impact (50% reduction; p < 0.05).
This represents the first successful application of Six Sigma corporate performance-improvement method impacting purely clinical outcomes. CR-BSI reduction was highly substantial and sustained after other traditional strategies had failed.
SourceAvailable from: bemecollaboration.org
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: We systematically reviewed ICU-based knowledge translation studies to assess the impact of knowledge translation interventions on processes and outcomes of care. We searched electronic databases (to July, 2010) without language restrictions and hand-searched reference lists of relevant studies and reviews. Two reviewers independently identified randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing any ICU-based knowledge translation intervention (e.g., protocols, guidelines, and audit and feedback) to management without a knowledge translation intervention. We focused on clinical topics that were addressed in greater than or equal to five studies. Pairs of reviewers abstracted data on the clinical topic, knowledge translation intervention(s), process of care measures, and patient outcomes. For each individual or combination of knowledge translation intervention(s) addressed in greater than or equal to three studies, we summarized each study using median risk ratio for dichotomous and standardized mean difference for continuous process measures. We used random-effects models. Anticipating a small number of randomized controlled trials, our primary meta-analyses included randomized controlled trials and observational studies. In separate sensitivity analyses, we excluded randomized controlled trials and collapsed protocols, guidelines, and bundles into one category of intervention. We conducted meta-analyses for clinical outcomes (ICU and hospital mortality, ventilator-associated pneumonia, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ICU length of stay) related to interventions that were associated with improvements in processes of care. From 11,742 publications, we included 119 investigations (seven randomized controlled trials, 112 observational studies) on nine clinical topics. Interventions that included protocols with or without education improved continuous process measures (seven observational studies and one randomized controlled trial; standardized mean difference [95% CI]: 0.26 [0.1, 0.42]; p = 0.001 and four observational studies and one randomized controlled trial; 0.83 [0.37, 1.29]; p = 0.0004, respectively). Heterogeneity among studies within topics ranged from low to extreme. The exclusion of randomized controlled trials did not change our results. Single-intervention and lower-quality studies had higher standardized mean differences compared to multiple-intervention and higher-quality studies (p = 0.013 and 0.016, respectively). There were no associated improvements in clinical outcomes. Knowledge translation interventions in the ICU that include protocols with or without education are associated with the greatest improvements in processes of critical care.Critical care medicine 08/2013; 41(11). DOI:10.1097/CCM.0b013e3182982b03 · 6.15 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The purpose of the study was to improve of performance for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) examination in the department of radiology. It was performed DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control). In the stage of definition, The fifth kinds of CTQ (critical to quality) by the kindness, the waiting time, the examination explanation, the waiting time and the waiting environment were selected by voice of customer. In the stage of measurement, the performed examinations and the reservation waiting time were measured each 1.77 and 1.69 sigma. In the stage of analysis, the potential key causes were determined the limited working hours and the difference of examination time of various entries. In the stage of improvement, MRI were performed with the operating system of 24 hours examination and the optimization of the difference of examination time by among of 30 minutes, 40 minutes, 50 minutes. Finally, the number of examinations and reserved waiting days were measured by each 3.17 and 1.71 sigma in the control stage.01/2011; 13(2).