A Self-Sustaining Antibiotic Prophylaxis Program to Reduce Surgical Site Infections.

Background: Our multi-institutional healthcare system had a higher-than-expected surgical site infection (SSI) rate. We aimed to improve our peri-operative antibiotic administration process. Gap analysis identified three opportunities for process improvement: standardized antibiotic selection, standardized second-line antibiotic agents for patients with allergies, and feedback regarding antibiotic administration compliance. Hypothesis: Implementation of a multifaceted quality improvement initiative including a near-real-time pre-operative antibiotic compliance feedback tool will improve compliance with antibiotic administration protocols, subsequently lowering SSI rate. Methods: A compliance feedback tool designed to provide monthly reports to all anesthesia and surgical personnel was implemented at two facilities, in September 2017 and December 2018. Internal case data were tracked for antibiotic compliance through June 2021, and these data were merged with American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) data at the case level to provide process and outcome measures for SSIs. Implementation success was evaluated by comparing protocol compliance and risk-adjusted rates of superficial and deep SSI before and after the quality improvement implementation. Results: A total of 20,385 patients were included in this study; 11,548 patients in the pre-implementation and 8,837 in the post-implementation groups. Baseline patient and operative characteristics were similar between groups, except the post-implementation group had a higher median expected SSI rate (2.2% vs. 1.6%). Post-implementation, antibiotic protocol compliance increased from 86.3% to 97.6%, and superficial and deep SSIs decreased from 2.8% to 1.9% (p < 0.001). The odds of superficial and deep SSI in patients in the post-implementation group was 0.69 (0.57, 0.83) times the odds of superficial and deep SSI in pre-implementation patients while adjusting for age, gender, diabetes mellitus, American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA) classification, wound class, smoking, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Observed-to-expected ratios of superficial and deep SSI decreased from 0.82 to 0.48 after the intervention. Conclusions: Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis standardization and providing near-real-time individualized feedback resulted in sustained improvement in peri-operative antibiotic compliance rates and reduced superficial and deep SSIs.

Evaluation of An Inpatient Pharmacy Consult on Discharge Medications in Bariatric Surgery Patients.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of an inpatient pharmacy consult on discharge medications following bariatric surgery. METHODS: A pharmacy consult for discharge medication review for bariatric surgery patients was instituted at an academic medical center. The intervention included conducting a medication history, reviewing home medications for updates post-bariatric surgery, creating and documenting a discharge medication plan, and providing patient education. The impact of the intervention was evaluated by comparing medication classes, doses, and formulations prescribed during the intervention relative to a historical control group. RESULTS: The study included 85 patients who received pharmacist intervention and 167 patients who did not receive pharmacist intervention following bariatric surgery. The prescription of an extended-release medication at discharge in the intervention group was reduced by 19.3% (28.7% vs. 9.4%, p = 0.0005). For patients on hypertension medications, 94.0% had their regimen reduced in the intervention group compared with 37.5% of patients in the control group (p < 0.001). Of patients on insulin at baseline, 87.5% of patients in the intervention group had dose reductions at discharge vs. 66.7% of patients in the control group (p = 0.37). No patients in the intervention group were discharged with oral antihyperglycemic medications or non-insulin injectable medications vs. 33.3% (p = 0.12) and 20.0% (p = 0.47), respectively, in the control group. Readmission rates at 30 days were insignificantly lower in the intervention group (3.5% vs. 4.2%, p = 1). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical pharmacist involvement in the discharge medication reconciliation process for bariatric surgery patients reduced prescribing of unadjusted medication classes, doses, and drug formulations.

Georgia Quality Improvement Programs Multi-Institutional Collection of Postoperative Opioid Data Using ACS-NSQIP Abstraction.

BACKGROUND: Excessive postoperative opioid prescribing contributes to opioid misuse throughout the US. The Georgia Quality Improvement Program (GQIP) is a collaboration of ACS-NSQIP participating hospitals. GQIP aimed to develop a multi-institutional opioid data collection platform as well as understand our current opioid-sparing strategy (OSS) usage and postoperative opioid prescribing patterns. METHODS: This study was initiated 7/2019, when 4 custom NSQIP variables were developed to capture OSS usage and postoperative opioid oral morphine equivalents (OMEs). After pilot collection, our discharge opioid variable required optimization for adequate data capture and was expanded from a free text option to 4 drop-down selection variables. Data collection then continued from 2/2020-5/2021. Logistic regression was used to determine associations with OSS usage. Average OMEs were calculated for common general surgery procedures and compared to national guidelines. RESULTS: After variable optimization, the percentage where a total discharge prescription OME could be calculated increased from 26% to 70% (P < .001). The study included 820 patients over 10 operations. There was a significant variation in OSS usage between GQIP centers. Laparoscopic cases had higher odds of OSS use (1.92 (1.38-2.66)) while OSS use had lower odds in black patients on univariate analysis (.69 (.51-.94)). On average 7 out of the 10 cases had higher OMEs prescribed compared to national guidelines recommendations. CONCLUSION: Developing a multi-institutional opioid data collection platform through ACS-NSQIP is feasible. Preselected drop-down boxes outperform free text variables. GQIP future quality improvement targets include variation in OSS use and opioid overprescribing.

Does Root Cause Analysis Improve Patient Safety? A Systematic Review at the Department of Veterans Affairs.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: While root cause analysis (RCA) is used to analyze medical errors with a systems approach, evidence demonstrating its effectiveness in reducing patient harm remains sparse. The heterogeneity of the RCA methodology at different health care organizations has posed challenges to studying its value. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has an established and standardized RCA approach, making it an ideal context to study RCA's impact. This review assessed whether implemented interventions recommended by RCAs were effective in mitigating preventable adverse events at the VA. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL and Business Source were searched for studies on RCAs performed at the VA that evaluated effectiveness of interventions and were published between 2010 and 2020. The Appraisal Tool for Cross-sectional Studies (AXIS) was used to assess bias of bias. RESULTS: The majority of studies eliminated during our eligibility process reported on RCAs without attention to their specific impact on patient safety. Ten retrospective studies met inclusion criteria and were part of the final review. Studies were grouped into adverse events related to incorrect surgical/invasive procedures, suicides, falls with injury, and all-cause adverse events. Six studies reported on effectiveness by demonstrating quantitative changes in adverse events over time or by location following a specific intervention. Four studies reported on the effectiveness of implemented interventions using a facility-based rating of "much better" or "better." CONCLUSIONS: Of the studies included in this review, all reported improvements following interventions implemented after RCAs, but with variability in study definitions and methodology to assess effectiveness. Increased reporting of outcomes following RCAs, with an emphasis on quantitative patient-related outcome measures, is needed to demonstrate the impact and value of the RCA.

Pharmacy-led initiative for improving peri-operative medication reconciliation among bariatric surgical patients: what is the role?

BACKGROUND: Multiple medication changes are common after bariatric surgery, but pharmacist assistance in this setting is not well described. This study evaluated the feasibility and effectiveness of a pharmacy-led initiative for facilitating discharge medicine reconciliation after bariatric surgery. METHODS: A standardized post-operative pharmacy consult evaluation was conducted on bariatric surgery inpatients at a single academic center starting 1/2/2019. Retrospective chart review evaluated patient characteristics, medication changes, and 30-day outcomes pre-intervention (7/2018-12/2018) and post-intervention (1/2019-12/2019). Two-sample t tests or binomial tests were used for continuous or categorical variables, respectively; a p-value of < 0.05 was deemed statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of 353 patients were identified for study inclusion (n = 158 pre-intervention, n = 195 post-intervention) with a mean age of 45 years, 87% female, and 71% sleeve gastrectomy. Overall pharmacy consultation compliance was 94% with 77.0% of home medication recommendations followed. Non-narcotic pain medication prescription use significantly increased (39% pre- vs. 54% post-intervention; p < 0.001). At discharge, the average number of changed or new medications significantly increased (3.7 ± 1.2 pre- vs. 4.2 ± 1.8 post-intervention; p = 0.003) while the average number of stopped medications was similar (1.2 ± 1.5 pre- vs. 1.5 ± 1.9 post-intervention; p = 0.09). Anti-hypertensive medications were decreased or stopped substantially more often with pharmacist input (44.7% pre- vs. 85.4% post-intervention; p < 0.001). Three medication-related readmissions happened pre-intervention with none post-intervention. Outpatient medication-related phone calls did considerably increase (31% pre- vs. 39% post-intervention; p = 0.04), while overall 30-day readmissions significantly decreased (7.6% pre- vs. 1.5% post-intervention; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Inpatient pharmacy consultation facilitated rapid alteration to more appropriate therapy for hypertension management and significantly increased use of non-narcotic pain medications upon discharge among bariatric surgery patients. Improved protocol adherence is anticipated with program maturity and patient education interventions will be deployed to address outpatient phone calls.