Evaluation of a health and social care programme to improve outcomes following critical illness: a multicentre study.

RATIONALE: At present, clinicians aiming to support patients through the challenges after critical care have limited evidence to base interventions. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate a multicentre integrated health and social care intervention for critical care survivors. A process evaluation assessed factors influencing the programme implementation. METHODS: This study evaluated the impact of the Intensive Care Syndrome: Promoting Independence and Return to Employment (InS:PIRE) programme. We compared patients who attended this programme with a usual care cohort from the same time period across nine hospital sites in Scotland. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measured via the EuroQol 5-dimension 5-level instrument, at 12 months post hospital discharge. Secondary outcome measures included self-efficacy, depression, anxiety and pain. RESULTS: 137 patients who received the InS:PIRE intervention completed outcome measures at 12 months. In the usual care cohort, 115 patients completed the measures. The two cohorts had similar baseline demographics. After adjustment, there was a significant absolute increase in HRQoL in the intervention cohort in relation to the usual care cohort (0.12, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.20, p=0.01). Patients in the InS:PIRE cohort also reported self-efficacy scores that were 7.7% higher (2.32 points higher, 95% CI 0.32 to 4.31, p=0.02), fewer symptoms of depression (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.76, p=0.01) and similar symptoms of anxiety (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.13, p=0.11). There was no significant difference in overall pain experience. Key facilitators for implementation were: integration with inpatient care, organisational engagement, flexibility to service inclusion; key barriers were: funding, staff availability and venue availability. CONCLUSIONS: This multicentre evaluation of a health and social care programme designed for survivors of critical illness appears to show benefit at 12 months following hospital discharge.

A multicentre evaluation exploring the impact of an integrated health and social care intervention for the caregivers of ICU survivors.

BACKGROUND: Caregivers and family members of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) survivors can face emotional problems following patient discharge from hospital. We aimed to evaluate the impact of a multi-centre integrated health and social care intervention, on caregiver and family member outcomes. METHODS: This study evaluated the impact of the Intensive Care Syndrome: Promoting Independence and Return to Employment (InS:PIRE) programme across 9 sites in Scotland. InS:PIRE is an integrated health and social care intervention. We compared caregivers who attended this programme with a contemporary control group of ICU caregivers (usual care cohort), who did not attend. RESULTS: The primary outcome was anxiety measured via the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at 12 months post-hospital discharge. Secondary outcome measures included depression, carer strain and clinical insomnia. A total of 170 caregivers had data available at 12 months for inclusion in this study; 81 caregivers attended the InS:PIRE intervention and completed outcome measures at 12 months post-hospital discharge. In the usual care cohort of caregivers, 89 completed measures. The two cohorts had similar baseline demographics. After adjustment, those caregivers who attended InS:PIRE demonstrated a significant improvement in symptoms of anxiety (OR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.20-0.89, p = 0.02), carer strain (OR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.16-0.98 p = 0.04) and clinical insomnia (OR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.17-0.77 p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in symptoms of depression at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: This multicentre evaluation has shown that caregivers who attended an integrated health and social care intervention reported improved emotional health and less symptoms of insomnia, 12 months after the delivery of the intervention.

Improving the quality of weekend medical handover on non-receiving medical hospital wards.

INTRODUCTION: Handover is the system by which the responsibility for immediate and ongoing care is transferred between healthcare professionals and can be an area of risk. The Royal College of Physicians (RCP) has recommended improvement and standardisation of handover. Locally, national training surveys have reported poor feedback regarding handover at Glasgow Royal Infirmary. AIM: To improve and standardise handover from weekday to weekend teams. METHODS: The Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) quality improvement framework was used. Interventions were derived from a driver diagram after consultation with relevant stakeholders. Four PDSA cycles were completed over a 4-month period:PDSA cycle 1-Introduction of standardised paper form on three wards.PDSA cycle 2-Introduction of electronic handover system on three wards.PDSA cycle 3-Expansion of electronic handover to seven wards.PDSA cycle 4-Expansion of electronic handover to all non-receiving medical wards.The outcome of interest was the percentage of patients with full information handed over based on a six-point scale derived from the RCP. Data were collected weekly throughout the study period. RESULTS: 18 data collection exercises were performed including 525 patients. During the initial phase there was an improvement in handover quality with 0/28 (0%) at baseline having all six points completed compared with 13/48 (27%) with standardised paper form and 21/42 (50%) with the electronic system (p<0.001). When the electronic handover form was expanded to all wards, the increased quality was maintained, however, to a lesser extent compared with the initial wards. CONCLUSION: A standardised electronic handover system was successfully introduced to downstream medical wards over a short time period. This led to an in improvement in the quality of handover in the initial wards involved. When expanded to a greater number of wards there was still an improvement in quality but to a lesser degree.

Post-intensive care syndrome following cardiothoracic critical care: Feasibility of a complex intervention.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the long-term outcomes of cardiac intensive care unit patients and their primary caregivers, and to explore the feasibility of implementing a complex intervention, designed to support problems associated with post-intensive care syndrome and post-intensive care syndrome-family, in the year following discharge from the cardiac intensive care unit. DESIGN: A complex multidisciplinary rehabilitation programme, delivered as a quality improvement initiative, in a single centre in the West of Scotland. Outcomes were measured using surveys of health related quality of life, self efficacy, anxiety, depression, pain, caregiver strain, and insomnia. PARTICIPANTS: Patients and their caregivers were invited to participate 12 weeks after hospital discharge. Twenty-seven patients and 23 caregivers attended the programme. RESULTS: Over 90% of patients had problems in at least one quality of life domain at baseline, 41% of patients had symptoms of anxiety and 22% had symptoms of depression. During the baseline visit, caregiver strain was present in 20% of caregivers, 57% had symptoms of anxiety, and 35% had symptoms of depression. Improvements in outcomes were seen in both patients and caregivers at 1-year follow-up. The programme was implemented, and iterative learning obtained about the content and the operationalization of the service, in order to understand feasibility. CONCLUSION: This small-scale quality improvement project has demonstrated that this complex multidisciplinary rehabilitation programme is feasible and has positive implications for patients following discharge from the cardiac intensive care unit, and their caregivers.

Understanding what matters to patients in critical care: An exploratory evaluation.

BACKGROUND: The delivery of person-centred care is a key priority for managers, policy makers, and clinicians in health care. The delivery person-centred care in critical care is challenging because of competing demands. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this quality improvement project was to understand what mattered to patients on a daily basis within the critical care environment. It aimed to understand personal goals and what patients needed to improve their experience. This paper reports on the outputs from this quality improvement project. DESIGN AND DATA ANALYSIS: During each daily ward round, patients were asked "what matters to you today?" Outputs from this were entered into the Daily Goals Sheet, which is utilized for every patient in our critical care unit or in the nursing notes. Using Framework Analysis, prevalent themes were extracted from the patient statements documented. RESULTS: A total of 196 unique patients were included in this analysis alongside 592 patient statements. Four broad themes were generated: medical outcomes and information, the critical care environment, personal care, and family and caregivers. CONCLUSION: The analysis of the data from this quality improvement project has demonstrated that, by asking a simple question within the context of a ward round, care can be enhanced and personalized and long-term outcomes potentially improved. More research is required to understand what the optimal methods are of implementing these requests. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Two main recommendations from practice emerged from this quality improvement project: asking patients "what matters to you?" on a daily basis may help support the humanization of the critical care environment, and visiting and access by families must be discussed with patients to ensure this is appropriate for their needs.

Impact of a pharmacist intervention at an intensive care rehabilitation clinic.

OBJECTIVE: While disruptions in medications are common among patients who survive critical illness, there is limited information about specific medication-related problems among survivors of critical care. This study sought to determine the prevalence of specific medication-related problems detected in patients, seen after critical care discharge. DESIGN: Consecutive patients attending an intensive care unit (ICU) follow-up programme were included in this single-centre service evaluation. SETTING: Tertiary care regional centre in Scotland (UK). PARTICIPANTS: 47 patients reviewed after critical care discharge at an ICU follow-up programme. INTERVENTIONS: Pharmacists conducted a full medication review, including: medicines reconciliation, assessing the appropriateness of each prescribed medication, identification of any medication-related problems and checking adherence. MEASUREMENTS: Medication-related problems in patients following critical care discharge. Interventions and medication-related problems were systematically graded and risk factors were identified using an adapted version of the National Patient Safety Agency Risk Matrix. MAIN RESULTS: 69 medication-related problems were identified in 38 (81%) of the 47 patients. The most common documented problem was drug omission (29%). 64% of the medication-related problems identified were classified as either moderate or major. The number of pain medications prescribed at discharge from intensive care was predictive of medication-related problems (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.14 to 4.26, p=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Medication problems are common following critical care. Better communication of medication changes both to patients and their ongoing care providers may be beneficial following a critical care admission. In the absence of highly effective communication, a pharmacy intervention may contribute substantially to an intensive care rehabilitation or recovery programme.

Intensive Care Syndrome: Promoting Independence and Return to Employment (InS:PIRE). Early evaluation of a complex intervention.

BACKGROUND: Many patients suffer significant physical, social and psychological problems in the months and years following critical care discharge. At present, there is minimal evidence of any effective interventions to support this patient group following hospital discharge. The aim of this project was to understand the impact of a complex intervention for ICU survivors. METHODS: Quality improvement project conducted between September 2014 and June 2016, enrolling 49 selected patients from one ICU in Scotland. To evaluate the impact of this programme outcomes were compared to an existing cohort of patients from the same ICU from 2008-2009. Patients attended a five week peer supported rehabilitation programme. This multidisciplinary programme included pharmacy, physiotherapy, nursing, medical, and psychology input. The primary outcome in this evaluation was the EQ-5D, a validated measure of health-related quality of life. The minimally clinically important difference (MCID) in the EQ-5D is 0.08. We also measured change in self-efficacy over the programme duration. Based on previous research, this study utilised a 2.4 (6%) point change in self-efficacy scores as a MCID. RESULTS: 40 patients (82%) completed follow-up surveys at 12 months. After regression adjustment for those factors known to impact recovery from critical care, there was a 0.07-0.16 point improvement in quality of life for those patients who took part in the intervention compared to historical controls from the same institution, depending on specific regression strategy used. Self-efficacy scores increased by 2.5 points (6.25%) over the duration of the five week programme (p = 0.003), and was sustained at one year post intervention. In the year following ICU, 15 InS:PIRE patients returned to employment or volunteering roles (88%) compared with 11 (46%) in the historical control group (p = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This historical control study suggests that a complex intervention may improve quality of life and self-efficacy in survivors of ICU. A larger, multi-centre study is needed to investigate this intervention further.

Caregiver strain following critical care discharge: An exploratory evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this exploratory evaluation was to understand the impact of critical care survivorship on caregivers. DESIGN: Family members who attended a quality improvement initiative within our critical care unit were asked to complete 4 questionnaires. SETTING: The setting for this study was a 20-bedded mixed critical care unit in a large teaching hospital in Scotland. Data were collected as a part of an evaluation of a quality improvement initiative. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-six carers completed the questionnaire set. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 53% of caregivers suffered significant strain. Poor quality of life in the patient was significantly associated with higher caregiver strain (P= .006). Anxiety was present in 69% of caregivers. Depression was present in 56% of caregivers, with a significant association between carer strain and depression (P< .001). Those caregivers who were defined as being strained also had significantly higher Insomnia Severity Index scores than those without carers strain (P= .007). CONCLUSION: This evaluation has demonstrated that there is a significant burden for caregivers of critical care survivors. Furthermore, they reported high levels of posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety, depression, and insomnia. Future work on rehabilitation from critical care should focus on the inclusion of caregivers.

Making Quality Improvement Happen in the Real World: Building Capability and Improving Multiple Projects at the Same Time.

Improving work as part of clinical practice is challenging. Plans for improvement are often made, but not followed through. A recent experience of failure in an ICU led to a change in approach. Members of the multi-professional team committed to meet weekly to learn about quality improvement by working on improvement projects. The group selected four topics they wanted to work on. These were: a bundle for patients admitted with septic shock; early (≤4 hours) sedation vacation after admission to ICU to allow titration of sedation to effect; achieving ≥ 20 minutes of mobilisation per day in ventilated patients; and medicines reconciliation. This quality improvement meeting was built into another regular weekly meeting. Initially the meeting ran for 30 minutes; each week some focused quality improvement teaching was provided in addition to talking about each individual project. The team found the meeting useful, they saw the progress they were making but felt the allotted time was too short. After 6 weeks, the initial early results persuaded the team to increase the duration of this meeting to 45 minutes. At the start reliability of each process was low (between 10% and 38%). All four projects achieved their stated process reliability aim. This took between 165 and 334 days for each project. Many tests of change ideas were required to achieve this. We have been able to improve multiple topics in a short period and produce sustainable change. The weekly meeting provided the focus to this improvement work. The teaching and coaching on quality improvement methodology that occurred as part of this meeting helped accelerate our rate of progress. We believe this experience and the learning we have gained will help provide ideas for others who also want to improve healthcare delivery in different settings.

Details behind the dots: How different intensive care units used common and contrasting methods to prevent ventilator associated pneumonia.

Care bundles promote delivery of effective care and improve patient outcomes. The understanding of how to improve delivery of care bundles is incomplete. The Scottish Patient Safety Programme is a national collaborative with the aim of improving the delivery of care to patients in acute hospitals in Scotland. Critical care is one of five workstreams in the programme. A programme goal is to reduce incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) to zero or 300 calendar days between events through use of a VAP Prevention bundle. We studied two ICUs participating in this programme. Each ICU had established infection surveillance system prior to the programme starting. Both units had an appreciable incidence of VAP. Initial VAP prevention bundle adherence was low in each ICU (35% and 41%). Comparing time periods before and after 80% bundle VAP prevention bundle adherence was achieved showed a similar reduction in VAP incidence (from 6.9 to 1.0, and from 7.8 to 1.4/1000 ventilation days). When compared each ICU used common and contrasting approaches to accomplish this improvement. We describe the five improvement knowledge systems used to improve bundle adherence to bundle elements in each hospital. The insights gained from these front-line clinical teams can be used as a template for improvement efforts in a variety of other healthcare settings.

Central line insertion bundle: experiences and challenges in an adult ICU.

BACKGROUND: Central venous catheters are used frequently in the intensive care unit (ICU). However, there is an associated morbidity, mortality and cost derived from their infectious and mechanical complications. The Scottish Patient Safety Programme (SPSP) has developed a multi faceted care bundle, with the aim of reducing catheter-related blood stream infections. AIM: This paper aims to identify and describe the experience and challenges in implementing the SPSP central line insertion bundle in one adult ICU, in a large inner city teaching hospital. INTERVENTIONS: 'Plan-Do-Study-Act' cycles, checklists for insertion and a standardized trolley were adopted to implement the central line insertion bundle in clinical practice. CONCLUSION/IMPLICATIONS: Improving the reliability of the central line insertion bundle has reduced infections. Key steps in the process were setting clear aims and ensuring staff understand the change process and measurement of results. This is fundamental to the success of any quality improvement process.

Accuracy of the preoperative assessment in predicting pulmonary risk after nonthoracic surgery.

We examined the accuracy of preoperative assessment in predicting postoperative pulmonary risk in a prospective cohort of 272 consecutive patients referred for evaluation before nonthoracic surgery. Outcomes were assessed by an independent investigator who was blinded to the preoperative data. There were 22 (8%) postoperative pulmonary complications. Statistically significant predictors of pulmonary complications (all p < or = 0.005) were as follows: hypercapnea of 45 mm Hg or more (odds ratio, 61.0), a FVC of less than 1.5 L/minute (odds ratio, 11.1), a maximal laryngeal height of 4 cm or less (odds ratio, 6.9), a forced expiratory time of 9 seconds or more (odds ratio, 5.7), smoking of 40 pack-years or more (odds ratio, 5.7), and a body mass index of 30 or more (odds ratio, 4.1). Multiple regression analyses revealed three preoperative clinical factors that are independently associated with pulmonary complications: an age of 65 years or more (odds ratio, 1.8; p = 0.02), smoking of 40 pack-years or more (odds ratio, 1.9; p = 0.02), and maximum laryngeal height of 4 cm or less (odds ratio, 2.0; p = 0.007). Thus, preoperative factors can identify those patients referred to pulmonologists or internists who are at increased risk for pulmonary complications after nonthoracic surgery.