Difficult airway response team: a novel quality improvement program for managing hospital-wide airway emergencies.

BACKGROUND: Difficult airway cases can quickly become emergencies, increasing the risk of life-threatening complications or death. Emergency airway management outside the operating room is particularly challenging. METHODS: We developed a quality improvement program-the Difficult Airway Response Team (DART)-to improve emergency airway management outside the operating room. DART was implemented by a team of anesthesiologists, otolaryngologists, trauma surgeons, emergency medicine physicians, and risk managers in 2005 at The Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, Maryland. The DART program had 3 core components: operations, safety, and education. The operations component focused on developing a multidisciplinary difficult airway response team, standardizing the emergency response process, and deploying difficult airway equipment carts throughout the hospital. The safety component focused on real-time monitoring of DART activations and learning from past DART events to continuously improve system-level performance. This objective entailed monitoring the paging system, reporting difficult airway events and DART activations to a Web-based registry, and using in situ simulations to identify and mitigate defects in the emergency airway management process. The educational component included development of a multispecialty difficult airway curriculum encompassing case-based lectures, simulation, and team building/communication to ensure consistency of care. Educational materials were also developed for non-DART staff and patients to inform them about the needs of patients with difficult airways and ensure continuity of care with other providers after discharge. RESULTS: Between July 2008 and June 2013, DART managed 360 adult difficult airway events comprising 8% of all code activations. Predisposing patient factors included body mass index >40, history of head and neck tumor, prior difficult intubation, cervical spine injury, airway edema, airway bleeding, and previous or current tracheostomy. Twenty-three patients (6%) required emergent surgical airways. Sixty-two patients (17%) were stabilized and transported to the operating room for definitive airway management. There were no airway management-related deaths, sentinel events, or malpractice claims in adult patients managed by DART. Five in situ simulations conducted in the first program year improved DART's teamwork, communication, and response times and increased the functionality of the difficult airway carts. Over the 5-year period, we conducted 18 airway courses, through which >200 providers were trained. CONCLUSIONS: DART is a comprehensive program for improving difficult airway management. Future studies will examine the comparative effectiveness of the DART program and evaluate how DART has impacted patient outcomes, operational efficiency, and costs of care.

Predicting the need for nonstandard tracheostomy tubes in critically ill patients.

PURPOSE: Few guidelines exist regarding the selection of a particular type or size of tracheostomy tube. Although nonstandard tubes can be placed over the percutaneous kit dilator, clinicians often place standard tracheostomy tubes and change to nonstandard tubes only after problems arise. This practice risks early tracheostomy tube change, possible bleeding, or loss of the airway. We sought to identify predictors of nonstandard tracheostomy tubes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this matched case-control study at an urban, academic, tertiary care medical center, we reviewed 1220 records of patients who received a tracheostomy. Seventy-seven patients received nonstandard tracheostomy tubes (cases), and 154 received standard tracheostomy tubes (controls). RESULTS: Sex, endotracheal tube size, severity of illness, and computed tomography scan measurement of the distance from the trachea to the skin at the level of the superior aspect of the anterior clavicle were significant predictors of nonstandard tracheostomy tubes. Specifically, trachea-to-skin distance >4.4 cm and endotracheal tube sizes ≥8.0 were associated with nonstandard tracheostomy. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that clinicians should consider using nonstandard tracheostomy tubes as the first choice if the patient is male with an endotracheal tube size ≥8.0 and has a trachea-to-skin distance >4.4 cm on the computed tomography scan.

Utilization of a standardized tracheostomy capping and decannulation protocol to improve patient safety.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To develop and assess the feasibility of a new standardized protocol to guide tracheostomy decannulation. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive review of quality improvement project. METHODS: A quality improvement project was conducted in the inpatient setting of a tertiary urban academic hospital. Adult patients who had received a tracheostomy and for whom the indication for tracheostomy had resolved were included. A multidisciplinary task force reviewed input from clinicians caring for tracheostomy patients and developed a protocol for screening, capping, and decannulation. The primary outcome measured was successful decannulation. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients were screened for a capping trial over a 12-month period; 54 were capped. Six patients were lost to follow-up. Fifty patients passed the capping trial, and all 50 were decannulated successfully. When decannulation was pursued in one patient who had twice failed the screening criteria and subsequent capping trials, the patient failed decannulation and ultimately required reintubation for the management of secretions. The screening tool had high sensitivity (90%) and positive predictive value (100%) for successful decannulation. Additionally, the number of reported patient safety concerns decreased from seven in the 6 months preceding implementation of the program to one report in the 6 months after implementation. CONCLUSION: The new tracheostomy capping and decannulation protocol assisted in predicting both successful and failed decannulation. Although several patients failed certain capping criteria initially, the protocol stipulated modifications of care that enabled successful decannulation. The screening tool had high sensitivity and promoted communication, standardization of practice, and patient safety.

Multidisciplinary team approach in the management of tracheostomy patients.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether the implementation of a multidisciplinary percutaneous tracheostomy team decreases complications, improves efficiency in patient care, and reduces length of stay and cost in patients undergoing percutaneous tracheostomy. STUDY DESIGN: Case series with planned data collection. SETTING: Urban, academic, tertiary care medical center. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent a percutaneous tracheostomy in 2004 and 2008, before and after the formation of a multidisciplinary percutaneous tracheostomy team, were included in the study. Data for the study were retrieved from a tracheostomy database. Measured outcomes include complications, efficiency, length of stay, and cost. RESULTS: Complications such as airway bleeding and physiological disturbances decreased significantly in 2008 as compared with 2004. The percentage of patients who received a tracheostomy within 2 days increased from 42.3% to 92% (2004 vs 2008), showing improvement in efficiency of care. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of infection rate, length of stay, or mortality. However, in a subanalysis, the length of stay was found to be decreased in patients whose primary diagnosis was a neurological disorder. Finally, despite the necessity of a hospital-based subsidy, the team approach yielded substantial financial benefit to the medical center. CONCLUSIONS: Airway bleeding, physiological disturbances, and efficiency of care improved after the institution of a multidisciplinary percutaneous tracheostomy team approach and may have a favorable impact on health care costs.