Reducing work pressure and IT problems and facilitating IT integration and audit & feedback help adherence to perioperative safety guidelines: a survey among 95 perioperative professionals

Background: To improve perioperative patient safety, guidelines for the preoperative, peroperative, andpostoperative phase were introduced in the Netherlands between 2010 and 2013. To help the implementation ofthese guidelines, we aimed to get a better understanding of the barriers and drivers of perioperative guidelineadherence and to explore what can be learned for future implementation projects in complex organizations.Methods: We developed a questionnaire survey based on the theoretical framework of Van Sluisveld et al. forclassifying barriers and facilitators. The questionnaire contained 57 statements derived from (a) an instrument formeasuring determinants of innovations by the Dutch Organization for Applied Scientific Research, (b) interviewswith quality and safety policy officers and perioperative professionals, and (c) a publication of Cabana et al. Thetarget group consisted of 232 perioperative professionals in nine hospitals. In addition to rating the statements on afive-point Likert scale (which were classified into the seven categories of the framework: factors relating to theintervention, society, implementation, organization, professional, patients, and social factors), respondents wereinvited to rank their three most important barriers in a separate, extra open-ended question.Results: Ninety-five professionals (41%) completed the questionnaire. Fifteen statements (26%) were considered tobe barriers, relating to social factors (N = 5), the organization (N = 4), the professional (N = 4), the patient (N = 1),and the intervention (N = 1). An integrated information system was considered an important facilitator (70.4%) aswell as audit and feedback (41.8%). The Barriers Top-3 question resulted in 75 different barriers in nearly allcategories. The most frequently reported barriers were as follows: time pressure (16% of the total number ofbarriers), emergency patients (8%), inefficient IT structure (4%), and workload (3%).Conclusions: We identified a wide range of barriers that are believed to hinder the use of the perioperative safetyguidelines, while an integrated information system and local data collection and feedback will also be necessary toengage perioperative teams. These barriers need to be locally prioritized and addressed by tailored implementationstrategies. These results may also be of relevance for guideline implementation in general in complex organizations.Trial registration: Dutch Trial Registry: NTR3568.Keywords: Guideline adherence, Implementation, Implementation barriers, Implementation facilitators, Patientsafety, Perioperative car

Increased adherence to perioperative safety guidelines associated with improved patient safety outcomes:a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised multicentre trial

Background: National Dutch guidelines have been introduced to improve suboptimal perioperative care. A multifaceted implementation programme (IMPlementatie Richtlijnen Operatieve VEiligheid [IMPROVE]) has been developed to support hospitals in applying these guidelines. This study evaluated the effectiveness of IMPROVE on guideline adherence and the association between guideline adherence and patient safety. Methods: Nine hospitals participated in this unblinded, superiority, stepped-wedge, cluster RCT in patients with major noncardiac surgery (mortality risk >= 1%). IMPROVE consisted of educational activities, audit and feedback, reminders, organisational, team-directed, and patient-mediated activities. The primary outcome of the study was guideline adherence measured by nine patient safety indicators on the process (stop moments from the composite STOP bundle, and timely administration of antibiotics) and on the structure of perioperative care. Secondary safety outcomes included in-hospital complications, postoperative wound infections, mortality, length of hospital stay, and unplanned care. Results: Data were analysed for 1934 patients. The IMPROVE programme improved one stop moment: 'discharge from recovery room' (+16%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9-23%). This stop moment was related to decreased mortality (-3%; 95% CI, -4% to -1%), fewer complications (-8%; 95% CI, -13% to -3%), and fewer unscheduled transfers to the ICU (-6%; 95% CI, -9% to -3%). IMPROVE negatively affected one other stop moment - 'discharge from the hospital' - possibly because of the limited resources of hospitals to improve all stop moments together. Conclusions: Mixed implementation effects of IMPROVE were found. We found some positive associations between guideline adherence and patient safety (i.e. mortality, complications, and unscheduled transfers to the ICU) except for the timely administration of antibiotics

Evaluation of physicians' professional performance: An iterative development and validation study of multisource feedback instruments

Contains fulltext : 107798.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: There is a global need to assess physicians' professional performance in actual clinical practice. Valid and reliable instruments are necessary to support these efforts. This study focuses on the reliability and validity, the influences of some sociodemographic biasing factors, associations between self and other evaluations, and the number of evaluations needed for reliable assessment of a physician based on the three instruments used for the multisource assessment of physicians' professional performance in the Netherlands. METHODS: This observational validation study of three instruments underlying multisource feedback (MSF) was set in 26 non-academic hospitals in the Netherlands. In total, 146 hospital-based physicians took part in the study. Each physician's professional performance was assessed by peers (physician colleagues), co-workers (including nurses, secretary assistants and other healthcare professionals) and patients. Physicians also completed a self-evaluation. Ratings of 864 peers, 894 co-workers and 1960 patients on MSF were available. We used principal components analysis and methods of classical test theory to evaluate the factor structure, reliability and validity of instruments. We used Pearson's correlation coefficient and linear mixed models to address other objectives. RESULTS: The peer, co-worker and patient instruments respectively had six factors, three factors and one factor with high internal consistencies (Cronbach's alpha 0.95 - 0.96). It appeared that only 2 percent of variance in the mean ratings could be attributed to biasing factors. Self-ratings were not correlated with peer, co-worker or patient ratings. However, ratings of peers, co-workers and patients were correlated. Five peer evaluations, five co-worker evaluations and 11 patient evaluations are required to achieve reliable results (reliability coefficient >/= 0.70). CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated that the three MSF instruments produced reliable and valid data for evaluating physicians' professional performance in the Netherlands. Scores from peers, co-workers and patients were not correlated with self-evaluations. Future research should examine improvement of performance when using MSF

How to promote healthy behaviours in patients? An overview of evidence for behaviour change techniques

To identify the evidence for the effectiveness of behaviour change techniques, when used by health-care professionals, in accomplishing health-promoting behaviours in patients. Reviews were used to extract data at a study level. A taxonomy was used to classify behaviour change techniques. We included 23 systematic reviews: 14 on smoking cessation, 6 on physical exercise, and 2 on healthy diets and 1 on both exercise and diets. None of the behaviour change techniques demonstrated clear effects in a convincing majority of the studies in which they were evaluated. Techniques targeting knowledge (n = 210 studies) and facilitation of behaviour (n = 172) were evaluated most frequently. However, self-monitoring of behaviour (positive effects in 56% of the studies), risk communication (52%) and use of social support (50%) were most often identified as effective. Insufficient insight into appropriateness of technique choice and quality of technique delivery hinder precise conclusions. Relatively, however, self-monitoring of behaviour, risk communication and use of social support are most effective. Health professionals should avoid thinking that providing knowledge, materials and professional support will be sufficient for patients to accomplish change and consider alternative strategies which may be more effective

Systematic care for caregivers of people with dementia in the ambulatory mental health service: designing a multicentre, cluster, randomized, controlled trial

Contains fulltext : 81435.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Care for people with dementia and their informal caregivers is a challenging aim in healthcare. There is an urgent need for cost-effective support programs that prevent informal caregivers of people with dementia from becoming overburdened, which might result in a delay or decrease of patient institutionalization. For this reason, we have developed the Systematic Care Program for Dementia (SCPD). The SCPD consists of an assessment of caregiver's sense of competence and suggestions on how to deal with competence deficiencies. The efficiency of the SCPD will be evaluated in our study. METHODS AND DESIGN: In our ongoing, cluster, randomized, single-blind, controlled trial, the participants in six mental health services in four regions of the Netherlands have been randomized per service. Professionals of the ambulatory mental health services (psychologists and social psychiatric nurses) have been randomly allocated to either the intervention group or the control group. The study population consists of community-dwelling people with dementia and their informal caregivers (patient-caregiver dyads) coming into the health service. The dyads have been clustered to the professionals. The primary outcome measure is the patient's admission to a nursing home or home for the elderly at 12 months of follow-up. This measure is the most important variable for estimating cost differences between the intervention group and the control group. The secondary outcome measure is the quality of the patient's and caregiver's lives. DISCUSSION: A novelty in the SCPD is the pro-active and systematic approach. The focus on the caregiver's sense of competence is relevant to economical healthcare, since this sense of competence is an important determinant of delay of institutionalization of people with dementia. The SCPD might be able to facilitate this with a relatively small cost investment for caregivers' support, which could result in a major decrease in costs in the management of dementia. Implementation on a national level will be started if the SCPD proves to be efficient. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00147693