Impact of a Novel Preoperative Patient-centered Surgical Wellness Program.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate if a preoperative wellness bundle significantly decreases the risk of hospital acquired infections (HAI). BACKGROUND: HAI threaten patient outcomes and are a significant burden to the healthcare system. Preoperative wellness efforts may significantly decrease the risk of infections. METHODS: A group of 12,396 surgical patients received a wellness bundle in a roller bag during preoperative screening at an urban academic medical center. The wellness bundle consisted of a chlorhexidine bath solution, immuno-nutrition supplements, incentive spirometer, topical mupirocin for the nostrils, and smoking cessation information. Study staff performed structured patient interviews, observations, and standardized surveys at key intervals throughout the perioperative period. Statistics compare HAI outcomes of patients in the wellness program to a nonintervention group using the Fisher's exact test, logistic regression, and Poisson regression. RESULTS: Patients in the nonintervention and intervention groups were similar in demographics, comorbidity, and type of operations. Compliance with each element was high (80% mupirocin, 72% immuno-nutrition, 71% chlorhexidine bath, 67% spirometer). The intervention group had statistically significant reductions in surgical site infections, Clostridium difficile, catheter associated urinary tract infections, and patient safety indicator 90. CONCLUSIONS: A novel, preoperative, patient-centered wellness program dramatically reduced HAI in surgical patients at an urban academic medical center.

Clinical comparison and agreement of PCR, antigen, and viral culture for the diagnosis of COVID-19: Clinical Agreement Between Diagnostics for COVID19.

The aim of this study is to compare the COVID-19 nasopharyngeal PCR (NP PCR) to antigen, nasal PCR, and viral culture. One-hundred-and-fourteen risk-stratified patients were tested by culture, nasal PCR, NP PCR, and Ag testing. Twenty (48%) of the high risk and 23 (32%) of the low risk were NP PCR positive. Compared with NP PCR, the sensitivity of nasal PCR, Sofia Ag, BinaxNOW Ag, and culture were 44%, 31%, 37%, and 15%. In the high risk group, the sensitivity of these tests improved to 71%, 37%, 50%, and 22%. Agreement between tests was highest between nasal PCR and both antigen tests. Patients who were NP PCR positive but antigen negative were more likely to have remote prior COVID-19 infection (p<0.01). Nasal PCR and antigen positive patients were more likely to have symptoms (p = 0.01).

Using a Modified Surprise Question as a Tool to Improve Primary Palliative Care in a Neurocritical Care Unit.

BACKGROUND: Specialty palliative care is a limited resource. The surprise question ("Would you be surprised if this patient died within the next 12 months?") is a screening tool for clinicians to identify people nearing the end of life. The researchers used a modified surprise question (MSQ) to improve primary palliative care in a neurocritical care unit. METHODS: A palliative care physician attended interdisciplinary rounds up to three days a week and asked the primary neurocritical care team, for each patient admitted in the previous 24 hours, the MSQ: "Would you be surprised if this patient died during this hospital stay?" If the response was "No," the unit social worker identified the patient's surrogate decision maker (SDM), and the primary team was encouraged to conduct a goals of care (GOC) conversation. The frequency of SDM documentation, occurrence and timing of GOC conversations, and palliative care and hospice consultations were measured for the baseline six months before the intervention, and six months after. RESULTS: Among 350 patients admitted to the neurocritical care unit during the study, the age, gender, prehospitalization presence of advance directives, and mortality were comparable between the baseline (n = 173) and intervention (n = 177) periods. Compared to the baseline period, there was a higher frequency during the intervention period of documentation of SDM (31.8% vs. 54.2%, p = 0.00002), all GOC conversations (35.3% vs. 53.1%, p = 0.008), GOC conversations conducted by the primary team (27.2% vs. 47.5%, p = 0.00009), palliative care consultations (11.6% vs. 23.2%, p = 0.004), and hospice consultations (2.3% vs. 9.6%, p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: The MSQ can be used as a tool to identify the risk of mortality, facilitate palliative care delivered by the primary team, and improve end-of-life care.

The Indiana Learning Health System Initiative: Early experience developing a collaborative, regional learning health system.

INTRODUCTION: Learning health systems (LHSs) are usually created and maintained by single institutions or healthcare systems. The Indiana Learning Health System Initiative (ILHSI) is a new multi-institutional, collaborative regional LHS initiative led by the Regenstrief Institute (RI) and developed in partnership with five additional organizations: two Indiana-based health systems, two schools at Indiana University, and our state-wide health information exchange. We report our experiences and lessons learned during the initial 2-year phase of developing and implementing the ILHSI. METHODS: The initial goals of the ILHSI were to instantiate the concept, establish partnerships, and perform LHS pilot projects to inform expansion. We established shared governance and technical capabilities, conducted a literature review-based and regional environmental scan, and convened key stakeholders to iteratively identify focus areas, and select and implement six initial joint projects. RESULTS: The ILHSI successfully collaborated with its partner organizations to establish a foundational governance structure, set goals and strategies, and prioritize projects and training activities. We developed and deployed strategies to effectively use health system and regional HIE infrastructure and minimize information silos, a frequent challenge for multi-organizational LHSs. Successful projects were diverse and included deploying a Fast Healthcare Interoperability Standards (FHIR)-based tool across emergency departments state-wide, analyzing free-text elements of cross-hospital surveys, and developing models to provide clinical decision support based on clinical and social determinants of health. We also experienced organizational challenges, including changes in key leadership personnel and varying levels of engagement with health system partners, which impacted initial ILHSI efforts and structures. Reflecting on these early experiences, we identified lessons learned and next steps. CONCLUSIONS: Multi-organizational LHSs can be challenging to develop but present the opportunity to leverage learning across multiple organizations and systems to benefit the general population. Attention to governance decisions, shared goal setting and monitoring, and careful selection of projects are important for early success.

Strategies for the successful implementation of disinfecting port protectors to reduce CLABSI in a large tertiary care teaching hospital.

Disinfecting port protectors are a supplement to the central line-associated bloodstream infection prevention bundle as an optional recommendation from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Despite evidence of effectiveness, few centers have successfully reported systematic, sustained implementation of these devices. In this article, we discuss a successful implementation in a large tertiary care teaching hospital, using an evidence-based, multidisciplinary approach. Infection prevention; Bacteremia; Ethanol caps; Bundle measures; Quality improvement; Hub infection.