Quality improvement collaborative to optimize heart failure care in patients from a network of clinics in Argentina during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Heart failure (HF) is a major clinical and public health problem associated with significant mortality, morbidity, and health-care costs. Despite the existence of evidence-based guidelines for the optimal treatment of HF, the quality of care remains suboptimal. Our aim was to increase the use a care bundle in 50% of enrolled subjects during their hospitalization and discharge and to reduce their readmission for HF causes by 10%. We conducted an uncontrolled before-after study in eight hospitals in Argentina to evaluate the effect of a quality improvement intervention on the use of an HF care bundle in patients with HF New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class II-III. The HF bundle of care included medication, continuum of care, lifestyle habits, and predischarge examinations. Training and follow-up of multidisciplinary teams in each center were performed through learning sessions and plan-do-study-act improvement cycles. Data collectors reviewed bundle compliance in the health records of recruited patients after their hospital discharge and verified readmissions through phone calls to patients within 30-40 days after discharge. We recruited 200 patients (83 before and 127 during the intervention phase), and bundle compliance increased from 9.6% to 28.3% [odds ratio 3.71, 95% confidence interval (8.46; 1.63); P = .002]. Despite a slow improvement during the first months, bundle compliance gained momentum near the end of the intervention surpassing 80%. We observed a non-significant decreased readmission rate within 30 days of discharge due to HF in the postintervention period [8.4% vs. 5.5%, odds ratio 0.63, 95% CI (1.88; 0.21); P = .410]. Qualitative analysis showed that members of the intervention teams acknowledged the improvement of work organization and standardization of care, teamwork, shared mental model, and health record completeness as well as the utility of training fellows. Despite the challenges related to the pandemic, better care of patients with HF NYHA Class II-III was possible through simple interventions and collaborative work. Graphical abstract.

Improvement in antibacterial use in intensive care units from Argentina: A quality improvement collaborative process evaluation using Normalization Process Theory.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare-associated infections and antibiotic resistance worsen globally. Antibiotic stewardship programs (ASP) aim to optimise infection treatment and curb resistance, yet implementation hurdles persist. This study examined ASP challenges in ICUs. METHODS: This study employed a qualitative methodological design to evaluate the implementation process of an antibiotic stewardship program (ASP) in eight intensive care units (ICUs) across Argentina. Thirty-four semi-structured interviews with healthcare workers (HCWs) were conducted. Interviews were analysed guided by Normalisation Process Theory, examining coherence, cognitive participation, collective action, and reflexive monitoring constructs. RESULTS: Key challenges included insufficient human resources, lack of institutional support, and resistance to change, particularly among staff not initially involved in the study. Despite these challenges, the program saw partial success in improving ICU practices, particularly in antibiotic use and communication across departments. The main strategy implemented in this quality improvement collaborative was the use of improvement cycles, which served as the central component for driving change. However, participation in improvement cycles was inconsistent, and sustainability post-intervention remains uncertain due to workload pressures and the need for continuous education. Concerns about workload and communication barriers persisted. Many participants did not perceive training as a separate component, which led to low engagement. Resistance to change became evident during modifications to clinical guidelines. The intervention had a positive impact on various processes, including communication and record keeping. CONCLUSION: This study underscores the persistent challenges in implementing ASPs in healthcare, emphasising the need for enhanced collaboration, workforce capacity building, and evidence-based practices to overcome barriers and optimize antimicrobial use to improve patient outcomes.

Optimising antibacterial utilisation in Argentine intensive care units: a quality improvement collaborative.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence from antimicrobial stewardship programmes in less-resourced settings. This study aimed to improve the quality of antibacterial prescriptions by mitigating overuse and promoting the use of narrow-spectrum agents in intensive care units (ICUs) in a middle-income country. METHODS: We established a quality improvement collaborative (QIC) model involving nine Argentine ICUs over 11 months with a 16-week baseline period (BP) and a 32-week implementation period (IP). Our intervention package included audits and feedback on antibacterial use, facility-specific treatment guidelines, antibacterial timeouts, pharmacy-based interventions and education. The intervention was delivered in two learning sessions with three action periods along with coaching support and basic quality improvement training. RESULTS: We included 912 patients, 357 in BP and 555 in IP. The latter had higher APACHE II (17 (95% CI: 12 to 21) vs 15 (95% CI: 11 to 20), p=0.036), SOFA scores (6 (95% CI: 4 to 9) vs 5 (95% CI: 3 to 8), p=0.006), renal failure (41.6% vs 33.1%, p=0.009), sepsis (36.1% vs 31.6%, p<0.001) and septic shock (40.0% vs 33.8%, p<0.001). The days of antibacterial therapy (DOT) were similar between the groups (change in the slope from BP to IP 28.1 (95% CI: -17.4 to 73.5), p=0.2405). There were no differences in the antibacterial defined daily dose (DDD) between the groups (change in the slope from BP to IP 43.9, (95% CI: -12.3 to 100.0), p=0.1413).The rate of antibacterial de-escalation based on microbiological culture was higher during the IP (62.0% vs 45.3%, p<0.001).The infection prevention control (IPC) assessment framework was increased in eight ICUs. CONCLUSION: Implementing an antimicrobial stewardship program in ICUs in a middle-income country via a QIC demonstrated success in improving antibacterial de-escalation based on microbiological culture results, but not on DOT or DDD. In addition, eight out of nine ICUs improved their IPC Assessment Framework Score.

Handoff improvement and adverse event reduction programme implementation in paediatric intensive care units in Argentina: a stepped-wedge trial.

BACKGROUND: There are only a few studies on handoff quality and adverse events (AEs) rigorously evaluating handoff improvement programmes' effectiveness. None of them have been conducted in low and middle-income countries. We aimed to evaluate the effect of a handoff programme implementation in reducing AE frequency in paediatric intensive care units (PICUs). METHODS: Facility-based, cluster-randomised, stepped-wedge trial in six Argentine PICUs in five hospitals, with >20 admissions per month. The study was conducted from July 2018 to May 2019, and all units at least were involved for 3 months in the control period and 4 months in the intervention period. The intervention comprised a Spanish version of the I-PASS handoff bundle consisting of a written and verbal handoff using mnemonics, an introductory workshop with teamwork training, an advertising campaign, simulation exercises, observation and standardised feedback of handoffs. Medical records (MR) were reviewed using trigger tool methodology to identify AEs (primary outcome). Handoff compliance and duration were evaluated by direct observation. RESULTS: We reviewed 1465 MRs: 767 in the control period and 698 in the intervention period. We did not observe differences in the rates of preventable AE per 1000 days of hospitalisation (control 60.4 (37.5-97.4) vs intervention 60.4 (33.2-109.9), p=0.99, risk ratio: 1.0 (0.74-1.34)), and no changes in the categories or AE types. We evaluated 841 handoffs: 396 in the control period and 445 in the intervention period. Compliance with all items in the verbal and written handoffs was significantly higher in the intervention group. We observed no difference in the handoff time in both periods (control 35.7 min (29.6-41.8) vs intervention 34.7 min (26.5-42.1); difference 1.43 min (95% CI -2.63 to 5.49, p=0.49)). The providers' perception of improved communication did not change. CONCLUSIONS: After the implementation of the I-PASS bundle, compliance with handoff items improved. Nevertheless, no differences were observed in the AEs' frequency or the perception of enhanced communication. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03924570.

Implementation of a structured patient handoff between health care providers at a private facility in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires. / Implementación de un pase estructurado de pacientes entre profesionales en una institución privada de la Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires.

INTRODUCTION: Failures in communication are common during patient handoffs between physicians, which predisposes to errors. Few articles have been published on this topic in Argentina. For this reason, our objective was to confirm whether using a structured handoff (I-PASS), which has been successfully used in the USA by Doctor Starmer, may reduce the omission of key data without prolonging its duration at our department. POULATION AND METHODS: The study was conducted at a private facility in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires between June 15th, 2017 and March 31st, 2018. It had a quasi-experimental, uncontrolled, before-and-after design. Pre- and post-intervention handoffs were assessed. The intervention included training physicians on how to use a structured handoff mnemonic (I-PASS: illness severity, patient summary, action list, situation awareness and contingency planning, synthesis by receiver), training on team work, written computerized handoff document, feedback observations, and simulation. RESULTS: A total of 158 and 124 pre- and postintervention assessments were done respectively. The pre- and post-intervention comparison showed a significant improvement in most of the handoff key points. The time used for the handoff was 199 seconds (174-225) before the intervention and 210 seconds (190-230) after the intervention, p = 0.523; interruptions also decreased significantly. CONCLUSION: Introducing the I-PASS program reduced key data omission without prolonging handoffs. Interruptions were also reduced.

Introducción. Las fallas en la comunicación son frecuentes en los pases de guardia entre médicos, lo que predispone a cometer errores. Hay escasas publicaciones en nuestro país sobre este tema. Por eso, nuestro objetivo fue corroborar si el uso de un pase estructurado (I-PASS) utilizado en EE. UU. por la Dra. Starmer, con excelentes resultados, podría reducir la omisión de datos clave sin prolongar su duración en nuestro Servicio. Población y métodos. El estudio se realizó en una institución privada de la Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires desde el 15 de junio de 2017 al 31 de marzo de 2018. El diseño fue cuasiexperimental, antes-después, no controlado. Se evaluaron los pases de guardia pre- y posintervención. La intervención incluyó la capacitación de los médicos en un pase estructurado cuya regla mnemotécnica era I-PASS (importancia de la enfermedad, resumen del paciente, lista de acciones, situaciones y planes de contingencia, síntesis por el receptor), entrenamiento en trabajo en equipo, pase escrito digitalizado, observaciones con devolución y simulación. Resultados. Se realizaron 158 evaluaciones preintervención y 124 posintervención.La comparación pre- y posintervención mostró una mejoría significativa en la mayoría de los datos clave del pase de guardia. El tiempo empleado en el pase fue de 199 segundos (174- 225) preintervención y 210 segundos (190-230) posintervención, p = 0,523; además, se redujeron marcadamente las interrupciones. Conclusión. La introducción del programa I-PASS redujo la omisión de datos clave sin prolongar la duración de los pases. Se lograron reducir las interrupciones.

Implementación de un pase estructurado de pacientes entre profesionales en una institución privada de la Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires / Implementation of a structured patient handoff between health care providers at a private facility in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires

Introducción. Las fallas en la comunicación son frecuentes en los pases de guardia entre médicos, lo que predispone a cometer errores. Hay escasas publicaciones en nuestro país sobre este tema. Por eso, nuestro objetivo fue corroborar si el uso de un pase estructurado (I-PASS) utilizado en EE. UU. por la Dra. Starmer, con excelentes resultados, podría reducir la omisión de datos clave sin prolongar su duración en nuestro Servicio.Población y métodos. El estudio se realizó en una institución privada de la Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires desde el 15 de junio de 2017 al 31 de marzo de 2018. El diseño fue cuasiexperimental, antes-después, no controlado. Se evaluaron los pases de guardia pre- y posintervención. La intervención incluyó la capacitación de los médicos en un pase estructurado cuya regla mnemotécnica era I-PASS (importancia de la enfermedad, resumen del paciente, lista de acciones, situaciones y planes de contingencia, síntesis por el receptor), entrenamiento en trabajo en equipo, pase escrito digitalizado, observaciones con devolución y simulación.Resultados. Se realizaron 158 evaluaciones preintervención y 124 posintervención.La comparación pre- y posintervención mostró una mejoría significativa en la mayoría de los datos clave del pase de guardia. El tiempo empleado en el pase fue de 199 segundos (174-225) preintervención y 210 segundos (190-230) posintervención, p = 0,523; además, se redujeron marcadamente las interrupciones.Conclusión. La introducción del programa I-PASS redujo la omisión de datos clave sin prolongar la duración de los pases. Se lograron reducir las interrupciones.

Introduction. Failures in communication are common during patient handoffs between physicians, which predisposes to errors. Few articles have been published on this topic in Argentina. For this reason, our objective was to confirm whether using a structured handoff (I-PASS), which has been successfully used in the USA by Doctor Starmer, may reduce the omission of key data without prolonging its duration at our department.Population and methods. The study was conducted at a private facility in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires between June 15th, 2017 and March 31st, 2018. It had a quasi-experimental, uncontrolled, before-and-after design. Pre- and post-intervention handoffs were assessed. The intervention included training physicians on how to use a structured handoff mnemonic (I-PASS: illness severity, patient summary, action list, situation awareness and contingency planning, synthesis by receiver), training on team work, written computerized handoff document, feedback observations, and simulation.Results. A total of 158 and 124 pre- and post- intervention assessments were done respectively. The pre- and post-intervention comparison showed a significant improvement in most of the handoff key points. The time used for the handoff was 199 seconds (174-225) before the intervention and 210 seconds (190-230) after the intervention, p = 0.523; interruptions also decreased significantly.Conclusion. Introducing the I-PASS program reduced key data omission without prolonging handoffs. Interruptions were also reduced.