Reducing Sedative-Hypnotics Among Hospitalized Patients: a Multi-centered Study.

BACKGROUND: Sedative-hypnotics are frequently prescribed for insomnia in hospital but are associated with preventable harms. OBJECTIVE, DESIGN, AND PARTICIPANTS: We aimed to examine whether a sedative-hypnotic reduction quality improvement bundle decreases the rate of sedative-hypnotic use among hospitalized patients, who were previously naïve to sedative-hypnotics. This interrupted time series study occurred between May 2016 and January 2019. Control data for 1 year prior to implementation and intervention data for at least 16 months were collected. The study occurred on 7 inpatient wards (general medicine, cardiology, nephrology, general surgery, and cardiovascular surgery wards) across 5 teaching hospitals in Toronto, Canada. INTERVENTION: Participating wards implemented a sedative-hypnotic reduction bundle (i.e., order set changes, audit-feedback, pharmacist-enabled medication reviews, sleep hygiene, daily sleep huddles, and staff/patient/family education) aimed to reduce in-hospital sedative-hypnotic initiation for insomnia in patients who were previously naïve to sedative-hypnotics. Each inpatient ward adapted the bundle prior to sustaining the intervention for a minimum of 16 months. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the proportion of sedative-hypnotic-naïve inpatients newly prescribed a sedative-hypnotic for sleep in hospital. Secondary measures include prescribing rates of other sedating medications, fall rates, length of stay, and mortality. KEY RESULTS: We included 8,970 patient discharges in the control period and 10,120 in the intervention period. Adjusted sedative-hypnotic prescriptions among naïve patients decreased from 15.48% (95% CI: 6.09-19.42) to 9.08% (p<0.001) (adjusted OR 0.814; 95% CI: 0.667-0.993, p=0.042). Unchanged secondary outcomes included mortality (adjusted OR 1.089; 95% CI: 0.786-1.508, p=0.608), falls (adjusted rate ratio 0.819; 95% CI: 0.625-1.073, p=0.148), or other sedating drug prescriptions (adjusted OR 1.046; 95% CI: 0.873-1.252, p=0.627). CONCLUSIONS: A sedative-hypnotic reduction quality improvement bundle implemented across 5 hospitals was associated with a sustained reduction in sedative-hypnotic prescriptions.

Addressing Barriers to Reducing Prescribing and Implementing Deprescribing of Sedative-Hypnotics in Primary Care.

OBJECTIVE: To describe interventions that target patient, provider, and system barriers to sedative-hypnotic (SH) deprescribing in the community and suggest strategies for healthcare teams. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE ALL and EMBASE Classic + EMBASE (March 10, 2021). STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: English-language studies in primary care settings. DATA SYNTHESIS: 20 studies were themed as patient-related and prescriber inertia, physician skills and awareness, and health system constraints. Patient education strategies reduced SH dose for 10% to 62% of participants, leading to discontinuation in 13% to 80% of participants. Policy interventions reduced targeted medication use by 10% to 50%. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: Patient engagement and empowerment successfully convince patients to deprescribe chronic SHs. Quality improvement strategies should also consider interventions directed at prescribers, including education and training, drug utilization reviews, or computer alerts indicating a potentially inappropriate prescription by medication, age, dose, or disease. Educational interventions were effective when they facilitated patient engagement and provided information on the harms and limited evidence supporting chronic use as well as the effectiveness of alternatives. Decision support tools were less effective than prescriber education with patient engagement, although they can be readily incorporated in the workflow through prescribing software. CONCLUSIONS: Several strategies with demonstrated efficacy in reducing SH use in community practice were identified. Education regarding SH risks, how to taper, and potential alternatives are essential details to provide to clinicians, patients, and families. The strategies presented can guide community healthcare teams toward reducing the community burden of SH use.

Do Not Waste a Crisis: Physician Engagement during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Physician engagement is an important factor in improving care quality and patient safety, but engaging physicians is not easy. Winston Churchill's famous assertion about never wasting a crisis has defined the approach taken by many leaders during the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper describes three case studies of successful physician engagement across the continuum of acute care, chronic care and primary care settings during the pandemic. These examples offer insights on physician engagement within unique settings by leveraging intrinsic motivators and Spurgeon's model of medical engagement.

Proton Pump Inhibitors in the Elderly Hospitalized Patient: Evaluating Appropriate Use and Deprescribing.

Background: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are often prescribed for elderly patients without appropriate indication, or for longer durations than recommended. Objective: To review appropriateness of PPI use prior to and in hospital, and deprescribing rates across different hospital units. Methods: Retrospective analysis of patients ≥65 years admitted to 5 acute care units: intensive care unit, acute care for elderly, orthopedics, surgery, and medicine. Patients who were "non-naive" (prehospital PPI use) or "naive" (new PPI initiated in hospital) users were included. For both groups, demographics, reason for admission, length of stay, comorbidities, name and number of home medications, PPI name, dose and indication, and PPI discharge instructions were collected. For naive patients, duration of in-hospital use and prescriber specialty was recorded. Results: Among non-naive patients (n = 377), for 37 patients (10%), the indication for a PPI was not appropriate, and for 92 patients (24%), the indication was unclear. Most patients had their home PPI continued while in hospital (87%) and at discharge (90%). Among naive (n = 93) patients, for 8 patients (9%), the indication for a PPI was not appropriate, and for 25 (27%) patients, the indication was unclear. PPI was prescribed to only 16 (18%) by the gastrointestinal consult service. Most patients had their new PPI continued at discharge (74%); only 7 (9%) were discharged with a plan to reassess PPI indication. Conclusion: PPIs are infrequently deprescribed during hospital admission, despite inappropriate or unclear indications for use. Thorough medication reconciliation, documentation of PPI indication and duration, and institutional focus on deprescribing are encouraged.

Sepsis now a priority: a quality improvement initiative for early sepsis recognition and care.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a triage-based screening algorithm and treatment order-sets aimed at improving the quality of care of all patients with sepsis presenting to our emergency department (ED). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study conducted during a pre-intervention period from 1 April 2010 to 31 March 2011 and a post-intervention period from 1 September 2014 to 30 April 2015. SETTING: A large teaching hospital located in Toronto, Ontario, Canada with a 35-bed ED. PARTICIPANTS: All patients meeting pre-specified sepsis criteria during the ED encounter. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Process of care measures included time to assessment by emergency physician, lactate measurement, blood culture collection, fluid and antibiotic administration. Intensive care unit (ICU) outcomes including admissions, length of stay (LOS) and deaths were reviewed. RESULTS: There were 346 patients pre-intervention, and 270 patients post-intervention. We significantly improved all process measures including mean time to antibiotics by 60 min (P = 0.003) and proportion of patients receiving fluid resuscitation (64.7% vs. 94.4%, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the number of patients admitted to ICU (P = 0.14). The median ICU LOS was shorter in the post-intervention group [2.0 days (interquartile range (IQR) 1.0-4.5 days) vs. 5.0 days (IQR 1.5-10.8 days), P = 0.04], and there was no difference in in-hospital mortality between groups (P = 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated that a triage-based sepsis screening tool results in expedited and consistent delivery of care, with a significant improvement in initial resuscitation measures.

Design of an orthopaedic-specific discharge summary.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing orthopaedic procedures experience major changes in function and daily routines upon their return home. Discharge summaries are an important communication tool that may play a role in optimizing a safe transition from hospital. Current care gaps and key elements of an ideal discharge summary specific for orthopaedic population are unknown. We sought to identify the challenges of current orthopaedic discharge summaries and to determine key elements of an ideal document. METHODS: Qualitative study survey using semi-structured interviews with a sample of 17 patients and clinicians representing diverse professions, backgrounds, and practice settings. We used the constant comparative method of qualitative analysis to define the experiences and perceptions of quality gaps and strategies to improve orthopaedic-specific discharge summaries. RESULTS: We identified 3 major themes describing factors perceived to be limiting the quality of current discharge summaries: 1) physician-centric documentation and the absence of a comprehensive, inter-professional perspective; 2) access to resources and health informatics; and 3) process variations in document creation and dissemination. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians and patients identified several factors limiting the quality of discharge summaries among orthopaedic inpatients. Incorporating these elements could improve hospital transitions.

Nosocomial meningitis diagnostic test characteristics: a systematic review.

Background: The incidence of nosocomial meningitis, and utility of lumbar puncture, is unclear in hospitalized patients without preceding neurosurgery or head trauma. Aim: We planned for a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate accuracy of clinical features and diagnostic utility of lumbar puncture in nosocomial meningitis. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process/ePubs, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Web of Science from inception until June 5, 2024. We included studies evaluating utility of clinical features, or lumbar puncture, to rule out nosocomial meningitis in patients without preceding neurosurgery or head trauma. We excluded studies examining community acquired meningitis, outbreaks, HIV positive individuals, and case reports. Outcomes included incidence, risk factors and diagnostic accuracy of clinical features for nosocomial meningitis, and lumbar puncture complications. Given few included studies and heterogeneity, we could only summarize incidence of nosocomial meningitis. Findings: Of 13,302 citations, we reviewed 197 manuscripts and included 6. There were 23 of 333 (6.9%, very low certainty) positive lumbar punctures among individuals who underwent lumbar puncture to rule out nosocomial meningitis. Conclusions: There were insufficient data to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of lumbar puncture in nosocomial meningitis in patients without preceding neurosurgery or head trauma. Very low certainty evidence indicates the incidence of nosocomial meningitis is low in this population. Given complications and costs associated with lumbar puncture, future studies should evaluate its utility in nosocomial meningitis. In the meantime, it may be reasonable to reserve lumbar puncture to instances of high suspicion.

The Incidence and Nature of Adverse Events During Inpatient Rehabilitation: A Retrospective Case Series.

OBJECTIVE: To describe and compare adverse event (AE) incidence, type, severity, and preventability in the Canadian inpatient rehabilitation setting. DESIGN: In this retrospective case series, AEs were identified through chart reviews from two Canadian academic tertiary post-acute care hospitals. AEs were characterized through descriptive statistics and compared using the Mantel-Haenszel and Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: During the study period, one site (n = 120) had 28 AEs and an incidence of 9.7 (95% CI 6.1-13.3) per 1000 patient days, and the other (n = 48) had 15 AEs and an incidence of 13.9 (95% CI 6.9-21) per 1000 patient days (p = 0.82). The two sites differed significantly in AE type (p = 0.033) and preventability (p = 0.002) but not severity. The most common AE type was medication/intravenous fluids-related (16/28, 57%) at one site and patient incidents (e.g., falls, pressure ulcers) at the other. Four percent (1/28) of AEs were preventable at one site, and 53% (8/15) at another. Most AEs at both sites were mild in severity. CONCLUSIONS: AEs significantly differed in type and preventability between the two sites. These results suggest the importance of context and the need for an organization-specific and tailored approach when addressing patient safety in inpatient rehabilitation settings.

Physician engagement in organisational patient safety through the implementation of a Medical Safety Huddle initiative: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Efforts to increase physician engagement in quality and safety are most often approached from an organisational or administrative perspective. Given hospital-based physicians' strong professional identification, physician-led strategies may offer a novel strategic approach to enhancing physician engagement. It remains unclear what role medical leadership can play in leading programmes to enhance physician engagement. In this study, we explore physicians' experience of participating in a Medical Safety Huddle initiative and how participation influences engagement with organisational quality and safety efforts. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study of the Medical Safety Huddle initiative implemented across six sites. The initiative consisted of short, physician focused and led, weekly meetings aimed at reviewing, anticipating and addressing patient safety issues. We conducted 29 semistructured interviews with leaders and participants. We applied an interpretive thematic analysis to the data using self-determination theory as an analytic lens. RESULTS: The results of the thematic analysis are organised in two themes, (1) relatedness and meaningfulness, and (2) progress and autonomy, representing two forms of intrinsic motivation for engagement that we found were leveraged through participation in the initiative. First, participation enabled a sense of community and a 'safe space' in which professionally relevant safety issues are discussed. Second, participation in the initiative created a growing sense of ability to have input in one's work environment. However, limited collaboration with other professional groups around patient safety and the ability to consistently address reported concerns highlights the need for leadership and organisational support for physician engagement. CONCLUSION: The Medical Safety Huddle initiative supports physician engagement in quality and safety through intrinsic motivation. However, the huddles' implementation must align with the organisation's multipronged patient safety agenda to support multidisciplinary collaborative quality and safety efforts and leaders must ensure mechanisms to consistently address reported safety concerns for sustained physician engagement.

Beyond Microsystem Fixes: Targeting National Drivers of Low-Value Care Comment on "Key Factors that Promote Low-Value Care: Views of Experts From the United States, Canada, and the Netherlands".

Low-value care drivers and interventions are often focused on a microsystem (eg, clinic or inpatient ward) or within a health system. Identification of national drivers such as payment structure and medical culture of overuse can help identify regional approaches to reducing low-value care. However, these approaches in isolation are insufficient and require additional strategies. These can include policy and payment changes and adopting shared decision-making (SDM). SDM has the potential to move medical culture away from the 'more is better' paternalistic and physician-centric culture to one that actively engages patients as full partners in managing their care.

"Get the DNR": residents' perceptions of goals of care conversations before and after an e-learning module.

Background: Residents frequently lead goals of care (GoC) conversations with patients and families to explore patient values and preferences and to establish patient-centered care plans. However, previous work has shown that the hidden curriculum may promote physician-driven agendas and poor communication in these discussions. We previously developed an online learning (e-learning) module that teaches a patient-centered approach to GoC conversations. We sought to explore residents' experiences and how the module might counteract the impact of the hidden curriculum on residents' perceptions and approaches to GoC conversations. Methods: Eleven first-year internal medicine residents from the University of Toronto underwent semi-structured interviews before and after completing the module. Themes were identified using principles of constructivist grounded theory. Results: Prior to module completion, residents described institutional and hierarchical pressures to "get the DNR" (Do-Not-Resuscitate), leading to physician-centered GoC conversations focused on code status, documentation, and efficiency. Tensions between formal and hidden curricula led to emotional dissonance and distress. However, after module completion, residents described new patient-centered conceptualizations and approaches to GoC conversations, feeling empowered to challenge physician-driven agendas. This shift was driven by greater alignment of the new approach with their internalized ethical values, greater tolerance of uncertainty and complexity in GoC decisions, and improved clinical encounters in practice. Conclusion: An e-learning module focused on teaching an evidence-based, patient-centered approach to GoC conversations appeared to promote a shift in residents' perspectives and approaches that may indirectly mitigate the influence of the hidden curriculum, with the potential to improve quality of communication and care.

Contexte: Les résidents sont souvent amenés à discuter des objectifs de soins (ODS) avec les patients et leurs familles afin d'explorer les valeurs et les préférences des patients et d'élaborer des plans de traitement centrés sur le patient. Cependant, certaines études montrent que le curriculum caché peut favoriser la mauvaise communication et l'orientation de la discussion selon les priorités du médecin. Nous avions déjà conçu un module d'apprentissage en ligne visant à enseigner une approche centrée sur le patient lors des discussions sur les ODS. Ici, nous explorons l'expérience des résidents et la façon dont ce module pourrait contrecarrer l'impact du curriculum caché sur leurs perceptions et leurs approches dans le cadre de ces discussions. Méthodes: Onze résidents de première année en médecine interne de l'Université de Toronto ont participé à des entretiens semi-structurés avant et après avoir suivi le module. Les thèmes ont été définis en appliquant les principes de la théorie ancrée constructiviste. Résultats: Avant de suivre le module, les résidents ont évoqué les pressions institutionnelles et hiérarchiques qu'ils subissent pour obtenir une décision de la part du patient quant à la non-réanimation, les obligeant à diriger la discussion sur les ODS et à l'axer sur la définition du statut de code, la documentation et l'efficacité. Les contradictions entre le programme officiel et le curriculum caché entraînaient chez eux une dissonance et une détresse émotionnelles. En revanche, après avoir terminé la formation, les résidents ont décrit de nouvelles conceptualisations et approches de la discussion sur les ODS, plutôt centrées sur le patient, grâce auxquelles ils se sentent habilités à contester le dictat du médecin quant aux sujets à aborder dans la discussion. Ce changement s'explique par un meilleur alignement de la nouvelle approche sur les valeurs éthiques qu'ils ont intériorisées, une plus grande tolérance à l'incertitude et à la complexité des décisions concernant les ODS et une amélioration des rencontres cliniques dans la pratique. Conclusion: Un module d'apprentissage en ligne axé sur l'enseignement d'une approche fondée sur les données probantes et centrée sur le patient pour les discussions sur les ODS semble favoriser un changement de perspective et d'approche chez les résidents, qui aurait pour effet d'atténuer indirectement l'influence du curriculum caché et d'améliorer la qualité de la communication et des soins.

Melatonin for Insomnia in Medical Inpatients: A Narrative Review.

In this narrative review, we describe what is known about non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments for insomnia in medical inpatients, with a focus on melatonin. Hospital-acquired insomnia is common, resulting in shortened total sleep time and more nighttime awakenings. Sleep disturbance has been shown to increase systemic inflammation, pain, and the likelihood of developing delirium in hospital. Treatment for insomnia includes both non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions, the latter of which requires careful consideration of risks and benefits given the known adverse effects. Though benzodiazepines and non-benzodiazepine benzodiazepine receptor agonists are commonly prescribed (i.e., sedative-hypnotics), they are relatively contraindicated for patients over the age of 65 due to the risk of increased falls, cognitive decline, and potential for withdrawal symptoms after long-term use. Exogenous melatonin has a comparatively low likelihood of adverse effects and drug-drug interactions and is at least as effective as other sedative-hypnotics. Though more research is needed on both its effectiveness and relative safety for inpatients, small doses of melatonin before bedtime may be an appropriate choice for inpatients when insomnia persists despite non-pharmacological interventions.

Protocol for a stepped wedge cluster randomized quality improvement project to evaluate the impact of medical safety huddles on patient safety.

Introduction: Physician engagement is crucial for furthering patient safety and quality improvement within healthcare organizations. Medical Safety Huddles, which are physician-specific huddles, is a novel way to engage physicians with patient safety and may reduce adverse events experienced by patients. We plan to conduct a multi-center quality improvement (QI) initiative to implement and evaluate Medical Safety Huddles. The primary objective is to determine the impact of the huddles on adverse events experienced by patients. Secondary objectives include assessing the impact of the huddles on patient safety culture and physician engagement, and a process evaluation to assess the fidelity of implementation. Methods: This stepped wedge cluster randomized study will be conducted at four academic inpatient hospitals over 19 months. Each site will adapt Medical Safety Huddles to its own practice context to best engage physicians. We will review randomly selected patient charts for adverse events. Generalized linear mixed effects regression will be used to estimate the overall intervention effect on adverse events. Process measures such as physician attendance rates and number of safety issues raised per huddle will be tracked to monitor implementation adherence. Conclusion: Medical Safety Huddles may help healthcare organizations and medical leaders to better engage physicians with patient safety. The project results will assess the fidelity of implementation and determine the impact of Medical Safety Huddles on patient safety.

The role of electronic versus written order sets in inappropriate laboratory testing among hospitalized medical patients.

IMPORTANCE: Reducing inappropriate blood tests has been highlighted by Choosing Wisely as a key area of focus. Computer physician order entry is one modifiable contributor, but little is known about how computer ordering compares to paper methods when it comes to low-value laboratory testing. OBJECTIVE: To determine which method of order entry is associated with a greater amount of appropriate lab testing. Furthermore, to identify ordering patterns for more targeted interventions in future. DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of inpatients discharged at two hospitals (one site uses paper order sets, while the other uses electronic order sets). SETTING: General internal medicine wards at two Canadian teaching hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: At site 1 (electronic orders), all general internal medicine discharges from May 2015 and February 2016. At site 2 (paper orders), all general internal medicine discharges from April 15, 2015 to May 26, 2015. MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURE(S): Main outcome was the percentage of inpatient discharges at each site with orders for daily laboratory tests for three days on admission. Secondary measures include proportion of tests with appropriate indications and rates of discontinuation of daily laboratory tests. RESULTS: We reviewed 395 discharges with a mean patient age of 69.5 ± 18.9 years and mean length of stay of 12.1 days. Daily laboratory tests were more common with paper orders (site 2) compared to electronic order sets (site 1) for complete blood count (CBC) (90.8% vs. 68.5%, p < 0.001), electrolytes (93.8% vs 71.5%, p < 0.001), and creatinine (93.8% vs 70.0%, p < 0.001) testing. However, paper orders for daily laboratory tests were more often appropriate, both in CBC (76.3% vs. 38.9%, p < 0.001) and electrolyte/creatinine (80.3% vs 44.2%, p < 0.001) testing. Discontinuation of daily labs occurred more often with paper orders (35.4% vs. 6.7%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Compared to written orders, daily laboratory testing using electronic ordering was associated with higher rates of inappropriate indications and lower rates of discontinuation. Our results support interventions aimed at ensuring electronic order sets incorporate appropriate indications and a mechanism for discontinuation of daily lab orders. Further studies aimed at understanding how the process of completing paper or electronic orders influence appropriateness of daily laboratory orders are needed to further minimize inappropriate testing.

'There was no preamble': Comparing the Transition from Hospital to Home in Different Care Settings.

Our qualitative descriptive study compared how older patients and their informal caregivers experienced the care transition from acute care or rehabilitation to home. We recruited patients 65 years of age or older, or their informal caregivers, from in-patient units within acute care hospitals and rehabilitation facilities to participate in semi-structured interviews. We identified emergent themes via thematic analysis. In all, 16 patients and four patient caregivers participated. Across all care settings, caregivers were integral in facilitating the transition as well as experiencing variable discharge preparation, health care providers' optimizing transitions, and missed care and medication discrepancies at transition points. Orthopedic and rehabilitation patients more commonly voiced prior transition experiences in discharge preparation, including having to unexpectedly coordinate and wait for outpatient services. Differing responses between acute care and orthopedic settings suggest that transitional care practices and policies favor an individualized approach that considers patients' previous experiences, needs, and care expectations.

Safety, effectiveness and sustainability of a laboratory intervention to de-adopt culture of midstream urine samples among hospitalized patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety, sustainability, and effectiveness of a laboratory intervention to reduce processing of midstream urine (MSU) cultures. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort. SETTING: Medical and surgical inpatients in a tertiary-care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: The study included 1,678 adult inpatients with an order for MSU culture. METHODS: From 2013 to 2019, ordered MSU cultures were not processed unless the laboratory was called. Patients were interviewed on days 0 and 4; from 2017 to 2019, day-30 follow-up was added. Primary outcome was serious adverse events due to not processing MSU cultures. Secondary outcomes were nonserious adverse events due to not processing MSU cultures, rates of MSU cultures submitted, proportion of MSU cultures processed, proportion of patients prescribed urinary tract infection (UTI)-directed antibiotics, and laboratory workload. RESULTS: Among 912 and 459 patients followed to days 4 and 30, respectively, no serious adverse events attributable to not processing MSU cultures were identified. However, 6 patients (0.66%) had prolonged urinary symptoms potentially associated with not processing MSU cultures. We estimated that 4 patients missed having empiric antibiotics stopped in response to negative MSU cultures, and 99 antibiotic courses for asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) and 8 antibiotic-associated adverse events were avoided. The rate of submitted MSU samples and proportion of patients receiving empiric UTI-directed antibiotics did not change. The proportion of MSU cultures processed declined from 59% to 49% (P < .0001), and total laboratory workload was reduced by 185 hours. CONCLUSIONS: De-adopting the processing of MSU cultures from medical and surgical inpatient units is safe and sustainable, and it reduces antibiotic prescriptions for ASB at a cost of prolonged urinary symptoms in a small proportion of patients.