Dataset Information

Effects of a National Quality Improvement Collaborative on ABCDEF Bundle Implementation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The ABCDEF bundle (Assess, prevent, and manage pain and Delirium; Both spontaneous awakening and breathing trials; Choice of analgesia/sedation; Early mobility; and Family engagement) improves intensive care unit outcomes, but adoption into practice is poor.

Objective

To assess the effect of quality improvement collaborative participation on ABCDEF bundle performance.

Methods

This interrupted time series analysis included 20 months of bundle performance data from 15 226 adults admitted to 68 US intensive care units. Segmented regression models were used to quantify complete and individual bundle element performance changes over time and compare performance patterns before (6 months) and after (14 months) collaborative initiation.

Results

Complete bundle performance rates were very low at baseline (<4%) but increased to 12% by the end. Complete bundle performance increased by 2 percentage points (SE, 0.9; P = .06) immediately after collaborative initiation. Each subsequent month was associated with an increase of 0.6 percentage points (SE, 0.2; P = .04). Performance rates increased significantly immediately after initiation for pain assessment (7.6% [SE, 2.0%], P = .002), sedation assessment (9.1% [SE, 3.7%], P = .02), and family engagement (7.8% [SE, 3%], P = .02) and then increased monthly at the same speed as the trend in the baseline period. Performance rates were lowest for spontaneous awakening/breathing trials and early mobility.

Conclusions

Quality improvement collaborative participation resulted in clinically meaningful, but small and variable, improvements in bundle performance. Opportunities remain to improve adoption of sedation, mechanical ventilation, and early mobility practices.

SUBMITTER: Balas MC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9972543 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effects of a National Quality Improvement Collaborative on ABCDEF Bundle Implementation.

Balas Michele C MC Tan Alai A Pun Brenda T BT Ely E Wesley EW Carson Shannon S SS Mion Lorraine L Barnes-Daly Mary Ann MA Vasilevskis Eduard E EE

American journal of critical care : an official publication, American Association of Critical-Care Nurses 20220101 1

<h4>Background</h4>The ABCDEF bundle (Assess, prevent, and manage pain and Delirium; Both spontaneous awakening and breathing trials; Choice of analgesia/sedation; Early mobility; and Family engagement) improves intensive care unit outcomes, but adoption into practice is poor.<h4>Objective</h4>To assess the effect of quality improvement collaborative participation on ABCDEF bundle performance.<h4>Methods</h4>This interrupted time series analysis included 20 months of bundle performance data from ...[more]

PMID: 34972842

Similar Datasets

Project description:The ICU Liberation (ABCDEF) Bundle can help to improve care and outcomes for ICU patients, but bundle implementation is far from universal. Understanding how ICU organizational characteristics influence bundle implementation could inform quality improvement efforts. We surveyed all hospitals in Michigan with adult ICUs to determine whether organizational characteristics were associated with bundle implementation and to determine the level of agreement between ICU physician and nurse leaders around ICU organizational characteristics and bundle implementation.DesignWe surveyed ICU physician and nurse leaders, assessing their safety culture, ICU team collaboration, and work environment. Using logistic and linear regression models, we compared these organizational characteristics to bundle element implementation, and also compared physician and nurse leaders' perceptions about organizational characteristics and bundle implementation.SettingAll (n = 72) acute care hospitals with adult ICUs in Michigan.SubjectsICU physician and nurse leader pairs from each hospital's main ICU.InterventionsWe developed, pilot-tested, and deployed an electronic survey to all subjects over a 3 month period in 2016.ResultsResults from 73 surveys (28 physicians, 45 nurses, 60% hospital response rate) demonstrated significant variation in hospital and ICU size and type, organizational characteristics, and physician/nurse perceptions of ICU organization and bundle implementation. We found that a robust safety culture and collaborative work environment that uses checklists to facilitate team communication are strongly associated with bundle implementation. There is also a significant dose-response effect between safety culture, a collaborative work environment, and overall bundle implementation.ConclusionsWe identified several specific ICU practices that can facilitate ABCDEF Bundle implementation. Our results can be used to develop effective bundle implementation strategies that leverage safety culture, interprofessional collaboration, and routine checklist use in ICUs to improve bundle implementation and performance.

Project description:ImportanceCancer screening deficits during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic were found to persist into 2021. Cancer-related deaths over the next decade are projected to increase if these deficits are not addressed.ObjectiveTo assess whether participation in a nationwide quality improvement (QI) collaborative, Return-to-Screening, was associated with restoration of cancer screening.Design, setting, and participantsAccredited cancer programs electively enrolled in this QI study. Project-specific targets were established on the basis of differences in mean monthly screening test volumes (MTVs) between representative prepandemic (September 2019 and January 2020) and pandemic (September 2020 and January 2021) periods to restore prepandemic volumes and achieve a minimum of 10% increase in MTV. Local QI teams implemented evidence-based screening interventions from June to November 2021 (intervention period), iteratively adjusting interventions according to their MTVs and target. Interrupted time series analyses was used to identify the intervention effect. Data analysis was performed from January to April 2022.ExposuresCollaborative QI support included provision of a Return-to-Screening plan-do-study-act protocol, evidence-based screening interventions, QI education, programmatic coordination, and calculation of screening deficits and targets.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the proportion of QI projects reaching target MTV and counterfactual differences in the aggregate number of screening tests across time periods.ResultsOf 859 cancer screening QI projects (452 for breast cancer, 134 for colorectal cancer, 244 for lung cancer, and 29 for cervical cancer) conducted by 786 accredited cancer programs, 676 projects (79%) reached their target MTV. There were no hospital characteristics associated with increased likelihood of reaching target MTV except for disease site (lung vs breast, odds ratio, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.7 to 4.7). During the preintervention period (April to May 2021), there was a decrease in the mean MTV (slope, -13.1 tests per month; 95% CI, -23.1 to -3.2 tests per month). Interventions were associated with a significant immediate (slope, 101.0 tests per month; 95% CI, 49.1 to 153.0 tests per month) and sustained (slope, 36.3 tests per month; 95% CI, 5.3 to 67.3 tests per month) increase in MTVs relative to the preintervention trends. Additional screening tests were performed during the intervention period compared with the prepandemic period (170 748 tests), the pandemic period (210 450 tests), and the preintervention period (722 427 tests).Conclusions and relevanceIn this QI study, participation in a national Return-to-Screening collaborative with a multifaceted QI intervention was associated with improvements in cancer screening. Future collaborative QI endeavors leveraging accreditation infrastructure may help address other gaps in cancer care.

Project description:Background: Data regarding delivery of evidence-based care to critically ill patients in Intensive Care Units (ICU) during the COVID-19 pandemic is crucial but lacking. This study aimed to evaluate the implementation rate of the ABCDEF bundle, which is a collection of six evidence-based ICU care initiatives which are strongly recommended to be incorporated into clinical practice, and ICU diaries for patients with and without COVID-19 infections in ICUs, and to analyze the impact of COVID-19 on implementation of each element of the bundle and independent associated factors. Methods: A world-wide 1-day point prevalence study investigated the delivery of the ABCDEF bundle and ICU diary to patients without or with COVID-19 infections on 27 January 2021 via an online questionnaire. Multivariable logistic regression analysis with adjustment for patient demographics evaluated the impact of COVID-19 and identified factors in ICU administrative structures and policies independently associated with delivery. Results: From 54 countries and 135 ICUs, 1,229 patients were eligible, and 607 (49%) had COVID-19 infections. Implementation rates were: entire bundle (without COVID-19: 0% and with COVID-19: 1%), Element A (regular pain assessment: 64 and 55%), Element B (both spontaneous awakening and breathing trials: 17 and 10%), Element C (regular sedation assessment: 45 and 61%), Element D (regular delirium assessment: 39 and 35%), Element E (exercise: 22 and 25%), Element F (family engagement/empowerment: 16 and 30%), and ICU diary (17 and 21%). The presence of COVID-19 was not associated with failure to implement individual elements. Independently associated factors for each element in common between the two groups included presence of a specific written protocol, application of a target/goal, and tele-ICU management. A lower income status country and a 3:1 nurse-patient ratio were significantly associated with non-implementation of elements A, C, and D, while a lower income status country was also associated with implementation of element F. Conclusions: Regardless of COVID-19 infection status, implementation rates for the ABCDEF bundle, for each element individually and an ICU diary were extremely low for patients without and with COVID-19 infections during the pandemic. Strategies to facilitate implementation of and adherence to the complete ABCDEF bundle should be optimized and addressed based on unit-specific barriers and facilitators.

Project description:ObjectiveDecades-old, common ICU practices including deep sedation, immobilization, and limited family access are being challenged. We endeavoured to evaluate the relationship between ABCDEF bundle performance and patient-centered outcomes in critical care.DesignProspective, multicenter, cohort study from a national quality improvement collaborative.Setting68 academic, community, and federal ICUs collected data during a 20-month period.Patients15,226 adults with at least one ICU day.InterventionsWe defined ABCDEF bundle performance (our main exposure) in two ways: 1) complete performance (patient received every eligible bundle element on any given day) and 2) proportional performance (percentage of eligible bundle elements performed on any given day). We explored the association between complete and proportional ABCDEF bundle performance and three sets of outcomes: patient-related (mortality, ICU and hospital discharge), symptom-related (mechanical ventilation, coma, delirium, pain, restraint use), and system-related (ICU readmission, discharge destination). All models were adjusted for a minimum of 18 a priori determined potential confounders.Measurements and resultsComplete ABCDEF bundle performance was associated with lower likelihood of seven outcomes: hospital death within 7 days (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.32; CI, 0.17-0.62), next-day mechanical ventilation (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.28; CI, 0.22-0.36), coma (AOR, 0.35; CI, 0.22-0.56), delirium (AOR, 0.60; CI, 0.49-0.72), physical restraint use (AOR, 0.37; CI, 0.30-0.46), ICU readmission (AOR, 0.54; CI, 0.37-0.79), and discharge to a facility other than home (AOR, 0.64; CI, 0.51-0.80). There was a consistent dose-response relationship between higher proportional bundle performance and improvements in each of the above-mentioned clinical outcomes (all p < 0.002). Significant pain was more frequently reported as bundle performance proportionally increased (p = 0.0001).ConclusionsABCDEF bundle performance showed significant and clinically meaningful improvements in outcomes including survival, mechanical ventilation use, coma, delirium, restraint-free care, ICU readmissions, and post-ICU discharge disposition.

Project description:ObjectivesOur objective was to examine the implementation and associated clinical outcomes of a comprehensive surgical site infection (SSI) reduction bundle in a large statewide surgical quality improvement collaborative leveraging a multifaceted implementation strategy.Summary background dataBundled perioperative interventions reduce colorectal SSI rates when enacted at individual hospitals, but the ability to implement comprehensive SSI bundles and to examine the resultant clinical effectiveness within a larger, diverse population of hospitals is unknown.MethodsA multifaceted SSI reduction bundle was developed and implemented in a large statewide surgical quality improvement collaborative through a novel implementation program consisting of guided implementation, data feedback, mentorship, process improvement training/coaching, and targeted-implementation toolkits. Bundle adherence and ACS NSQIP outcomes were examined preimplementation versus postimplementation.ResultsAmong 32 hospitals, there was a 2.5-fold relative increase in the proportion of patients completing at least 75% of bundle elements (preimplementation = 19.5% vs. postimplementation = 49.8%, P = 0.001). Largest adherence gains were seen in wound closure re-gowning/re-gloving (24.0% vs. 62.0%, P < 0.001), use of clean closing instruments (32.1% vs. 66.2%, P = 0.003), and preoperative chlorhexidine bathing (46.1% vs. 77.6%, P < 0.001). Multivariable analyses showed a trend toward lower risk of superficial incisional SSI in the postimplementation period compared to baseline (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.49-10.2, P = 0.06). As the adherence in the number of bundle elements increased, there was a significant decrease in superficial SSI rates (lowest adherence quintile, 4.6% vs. highest, 1.5%, P < 0.001).ConclusionsA comprehensive multifaceted SSI reduction bundle can be successfully implemented throughout a large quality improvement learning collaborative when coordinated quality improvement activities are leveraged, resulting in a 30% decline in SSI rates. Lower superficial SSI rates are associated with the number of adherent bundle elements a patient receives, rendering considerable benefits to institutions capable of implementing more components of the bundle.

Dataset Information

Effects of a National Quality Improvement Collaborative on ABCDEF Bundle Implementation.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Effects of a National Quality Improvement Collaborative on ABCDEF Bundle Implementation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets