Organizational interventions to implement improvements in patient care: a structured review of reviews

BACKGROUND: Changing the organization of patient care should contribute to improved patient outcomes as functioning of clinical teams and organizational structures are important enablers for improvement. OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of the research evidence on effects of organizational strategies to implement improvements in patient care. DESIGN: Structured review of published reviews of rigorous evaluations. DATA SOURCES: Published reviews of studies on organizational interventions. REVIEW METHODS: Searches were conducted in two data-bases (Pubmed, Cochrane Library) and in selected journals. Reviews were included, if these were based on a systematic search, focused on rigorous evaluations of organizational changes, and were published between 1995 and 2003. Two investigators independently extracted information from the reviews regarding their clinical focus, methodological quality and main quantitative findings. RESULTS: A total of 36 reviews were included, but not all were high-quality reviews. The reviews were too heterogeneous for quantitative synthesis. None of the strategies produced consistent effects. Professional performance was generally improved by revision of professional roles and computer systems for knowledge management. Patient outcomes was generally improved by multidisciplinary teams, integrated care services, and computer systems. Cost savings were reported from integrated care services. The benefits of quality management remained uncertain. CONCLUSION: There is a growing evidence base of rigorous evaluations of organizational strategies, but the evidence underlying some strategies is limited and for no strategy can the effects be predicted with high certainty

A theoretical lens for revealing the complexity of chronic care

The increasing prevalence of co-occurring multiple chronic conditions in an aging population has influenced the debate on complexity in chronic care and nowadays provides an impetus to the reform of numerous health systems. This article presents a theoretical lens for understanding the complexity of chronic care based on research and debate conducted in the context of multiple quality improvement programs over the last five years in Belgium and The Netherlands. We consider four major components of complexity in chronic care against a background of complex adaptive systems: (1) case (patient) complexity; (2) care complexity; (3) quality assessment complexity; and (4) health systems complexity. Each of these components represents a range of elements that contribute to the picture of complexity in chronic care. We emphasize that planning for chronic care requires equal attention to the complexity of all four components. It also requires multifaceted interventions and implementation strategies that target improvements in multiple outcomes related to the structural, process, and outcome components of care. Further empirical research is needed to assess the validity of our complexity framework in the health-care environment

Complexity and involvement as implementation challenges:results from a process analysis

Contains fulltext : 239780.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access

Inflammatory response in the acute phase of deep vein thrombosis

AbstractObjective: Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a multifactorial disease. Recently, inflammation has been suggested as a risk factor for DVT. The question is whether inflammation is a cause of venous thrombosis or rather a result of the thrombotic process. Methods: We studied the inflammatory response in the acute phase of DVT with interleukin-6, interleukin-8, and C-reactive protein (CRP) as inflammatory markers. Plasma concentrations were measured on the day of admission (day 0) in 40 patients with acute DVT confirmed with phlebography and in 33 patients with clinical suspicion of DVT but negative phlebography results (controls). In patients with DVT, inflammatory markers were also examined on five subsequent days. Results: On day 0, the median concentrations in plasma of interleukin-6, interleukin-8, and CRP were 15.0 pg/mL (range, <3 to 70 pg/mL), 7.0 pg/mL (range, <3 to 76 pg/mL), 37.5 mg/L (range, <7 to 164 mg/L), respectively, in the patient group and less than 3 pg/mL (range, <3 to 11 pg/mL; P <.001), 6.0 pg/mL (range, <3 to 52 pg/mL; P =.08), and 5.0 pg/L (range, <7 to 66 pg/L; P <.001), respectively, in the controls. During the next days, interleukin-6 concentration showed a gradual decline in patients with DVT from 15.0 to 5.5 pg/mL (P <.001), interleukin-8 concentration was relatively constant in time, and CRP concentration declined from 37.5 to 21.5 mg/L (P =.01). Conclusion: Our data show an apparent inflammatory response with highest measured concentrations of inflammatory markers on the day of admission and a subsequent decrease during the next days. This response supports the hypothesis that elevated inflammatory markers are a result rather than a cause of venous thrombosis. (J Vasc Surg 2002;35:701-6.

Reducing work pressure and IT problems and facilitating IT integration and audit &amp; 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

Developing the University of Tartu in Estonia into a wellnetworked Patient Safety Research Centre (PATSAFE): A study protocol

Background: Patient safety (PS) is a serious global public health problem affecting all countries. Estimates show that around 10 percent of the patients are harmed during hospital care, resulting in 23 million disability-adjusted life years lost per year. Experts emphasize research advancements as a key precondition for safer care. Aim: The Patient Safety Research Centre (PATSAFE) project enhances the Institute of Clinical Medicine of the University of Tartu’s (ICM-UT) research potential and capacities in PS in order to improve and strengthen knowledge and skills in methods, techniques and experience for PS research. Methods: A strategic partnership with Avedis Donabedian Research Institute in Spain, and IQ Healthcare in the Netherlands, both international leaders in PS research, enables the development of a long-lasting knowledge exchange, allowing the ICM-UT to capitalise on its current achievements and to overcome gaps in scientific excellence in the field of PS research. These twining activities will strengthen and raise the research profile of the ICM-UT academic staff and early-stage researchers (ESRs), by implementing the hands-on training on methods, techniques, and experience in PS research. The project also encourages the active participation of early stage researchers in PS research by increasing their soft skills, to ensure the continuity and sustainability of PS research in ICM-UT. Finally, development of the research strategy on PS contributes to the long-term sustainability of PS research in Estonia. To implement these activities, PATSAFE foresees a comprehensive strategy consisting of knowledge exchange, soft research skills capacity building, strategic planning, and strong dissemination and exploitation efforts. Expected results: As a result of the project, ICM-UT will have the capacity to carry out PS research using the appropriate methodology and the competences to apply state-of-the-art evidence-based strategies for PS research