Quality improvement strategies for diabetes care: Effects on outcomes for adults living with diabetes.

BACKGROUND: There is a large body of evidence evaluating quality improvement (QI) programmes to improve care for adults living with diabetes. These programmes are often comprised of multiple QI strategies, which may be implemented in various combinations. Decision-makers planning to implement or evaluate a new QI programme, or both, need reliable evidence on the relative effectiveness of different QI strategies (individually and in combination) for different patient populations. OBJECTIVES: To update existing systematic reviews of diabetes QI programmes and apply novel meta-analytical techniques to estimate the effectiveness of QI strategies (individually and in combination) on diabetes quality of care. SEARCH METHODS: We searched databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL) and trials registers (ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP) to 4 June 2019. We conducted a top-up search to 23 September 2021; we screened these search results and 42 studies meeting our eligibility criteria are available in the awaiting classification section. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised trials that assessed a QI programme to improve care in outpatient settings for people living with diabetes. QI programmes needed to evaluate at least one system- or provider-targeted QI strategy alone or in combination with a patient-targeted strategy. - System-targeted: case management (CM); team changes (TC); electronic patient registry (EPR); facilitated relay of clinical information (FR); continuous quality improvement (CQI). - Provider-targeted: audit and feedback (AF); clinician education (CE); clinician reminders (CR); financial incentives (FI). - Patient-targeted: patient education (PE); promotion of self-management (PSM); patient reminders (PR). Patient-targeted QI strategies needed to occur with a minimum of one provider or system-targeted strategy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We dual-screened search results and abstracted data on study design, study population and QI strategies. We assessed the impact of the programmes on 13 measures of diabetes care, including: glycaemic control (e.g. mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c)); cardiovascular risk factor management (e.g. mean systolic blood pressure (SBP), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), proportion of people living with diabetes that quit smoking or receiving cardiovascular medications); and screening/prevention of microvascular complications (e.g. proportion of patients receiving retinopathy or foot screening); and harms (e.g. proportion of patients experiencing adverse hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia). We modelled the association of each QI strategy with outcomes using a series of hierarchical multivariable meta-regression models in a Bayesian framework. The previous version of this review identified that different strategies were more or less effective depending on baseline levels of outcomes. To explore this further, we extended the main additive model for continuous outcomes (HbA1c, SBP and LDL-C) to include an interaction term between each strategy and average baseline risk for each study (baseline thresholds were based on a data-driven approach; we used the median of all baseline values reported in the trials). Based on model diagnostics, the baseline interaction models for HbA1c, SBP and LDL-C performed better than the main model and are therefore presented as the primary analyses for these outcomes. Based on the model results, we qualitatively ordered each QI strategy within three tiers (Top, Middle, Bottom) based on its magnitude of effect relative to the other QI strategies, where 'Top' indicates that the QI strategy was likely one of the most effective strategies for that specific outcome. Secondary analyses explored the sensitivity of results to choices in model specification and priors.  Additional information about the methods and results of the review are available as Appendices in an online repository. This review will be maintained as a living systematic review; we will update our syntheses as more data become available. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 553 trials (428 patient-randomised and 125 cluster-randomised trials), including a total of 412,161 participants. Of the included studies, 66% involved people living with type 2 diabetes only. Participants were 50% female and the median age of participants was 58.4 years. The mean duration of follow-up was 12.5 months. HbA1c was the commonest reported outcome; screening outcomes and outcomes related to cardiovascular medications, smoking and harms were reported infrequently. The most frequently evaluated QI strategies across all study arms were PE, PSM and CM, while the least frequently evaluated QI strategies included AF, FI and CQI. Our confidence in the evidence is limited due to a lack of information on how studies were conducted.  Four QI strategies (CM, TC, PE, PSM) were consistently identified as 'Top' across the majority of outcomes. All QI strategies were ranked as 'Top' for at least one key outcome. The majority of effects of individual QI strategies were modest, but when used in combination could result in meaningful population-level improvements across the majority of outcomes. The median number of QI strategies in multicomponent QI programmes was three.  Combinations of the three most effective QI strategies were estimated to lead to the below effects:  - PR + PSM + CE: decrease in HbA1c by 0.41% (credibility interval (CrI) -0.61 to -0.22) when baseline HbA1c < 8.3%; - CM + PE + EPR: decrease in HbA1c by 0.62% (CrI -0.84 to -0.39) when baseline HbA1c > 8.3%;  - PE + TC + PSM: reduction in SBP by 2.14 mmHg (CrI -3.80 to -0.52) when baseline SBP < 136 mmHg; - CM + TC + PSM: reduction in SBP by 4.39 mmHg (CrI -6.20 to -2.56) when baseline SBP > 136 mmHg;  - TC + PE + CM: LDL-C lowering of 5.73 mg/dL (CrI -7.93 to -3.61) when baseline LDL < 107 mg/dL; - TC + CM + CR: LDL-C lowering by 5.52 mg/dL (CrI -9.24 to -1.89) when baseline LDL > 107 mg/dL. Assuming a baseline screening rate of 50%, the three most effective QI strategies were estimated to lead to an absolute improvement of 33% in retinopathy screening (PE + PR + TC) and 38% absolute increase in foot screening (PE + TC + Other). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant body of evidence about QI programmes to improve the management of diabetes. Multicomponent QI programmes for diabetes care (comprised of effective QI strategies) may achieve meaningful population-level improvements across the majority of outcomes. For health system decision-makers, the evidence summarised in this review can be used to identify strategies to include in QI programmes. For researchers, this synthesis identifies higher-priority QI strategies to examine in further research regarding how to optimise their evaluation and effects. We will maintain this as a living systematic review.

Follow Up of Incidental High-Risk Pulmonary Nodules on Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography at Care Transitions.

BACKGROUND: Computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) detects incidental findings that require follow-up. In just over 50% of cases, those incidental findings are pulmonary nodules. Fleischner guidelines recommend that patients with nodules that have a high risk of malignancy should undergo CT follow-up within 3-12 months. OBJECTIVE: We examined the proportion of patients with pulmonary nodules requiring follow up who received repeat imaging within six weeks of the time frame recommended by the radiologist. DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study included all patients who underwent CTPA in the emergency department and inpatient settings at three teaching hospitals in Toronto, Canada between September 1, 2014, and August 31, 2015. Natural language processing software was applied to a linked radiology information system to identify all CTPAs that contained pulmonary nodules. Using manual review and prespecified exclusion criteria, we generated a cohort with possible new lung malignancy eligible for follow-up imaging; then we reviewed available health records to determine whether follow-up had occurred. RESULTS: Of the 1,910 CTPAs performed over the study period, 674 (35.3%) contained pulmonary nodules. Of the 259 patients with new nodules eligible for follow-up imaging, 65 received an explicit suggestion for follow-up by radiology (25.1%). Of these 65 patients, 35 (53.8%) did not receive repeat imaging within the recommended time frame. Explicit mention that follow-up was required in the discharge summary (P = .03), attending an outpatient follow-up visit (P < .001), and younger age (P = .03) were associated with receiving timely follow-up imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Over 50% of patients with new high-risk pulmonary nodules detected incidentally on CTPA did not receive timely follow-up imaging.

Physician Characteristics Associated With Ordering 4 Low-Value Screening Tests in Primary Care.

Importance: Efforts to reduce low-value tests and treatments in primary care are often ineffective. These efforts typically target physicians broadly, most of whom order low-value care infrequently. Objectives: To measure physician-level use rates of 4 low-value screening tests in primary care to investigate the presence and characteristics of primary care physicians who frequently order low-value care. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using administrative health care claims collected between April 1, 2012, and March 31, 2016, in Ontario, Canada. This study measured use of 4 low-value screening tests-repeated dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans, electrocardiograms (ECGs), Papanicolaou (Pap) tests, and chest radiographs (CXRs)-among low-risk outpatients rostered to a common cohort of primary care physicians. Exposures: Physician sex, years since medical school graduation, and primary care model. Main Outcomes and Measures: This study measured the number of tests to which a given physician ranked in the top quintile by ordering rate. The resulting cross-test score (range, 0-4) reflects a physician's propensity to order low-value care across screening tests. Physicians were then dichotomized into infrequent or isolated frequent users (score, 0 or 1, respectively) or generalized frequent users for 2 or more tests (score, ≥2). Results: The final sample consisted of 2394 primary care physicians (mean [SD] age, 51.3 [10.0] years; 50.2% female), who were predominantly Canadian medical school graduates (1701 [71.1%]), far removed from medical school graduation (median, 25.3 years; interquartile range, 17.3-32.3 years), and reimbursed via fee-for-service in a family health group (1130 [47.2%]). They ordered 302 509 low-value screening tests (74 167 DXA scans, 179 855 ECGs, 19 906 Pap tests, and 28 581 CXRs) after 3 428 557 ordering opportunities. Within the cohort, generalized frequent users represented 18.4% (441 of 2394) of physicians but ordered 39.2% (118 665 of 302 509) of all low-value screening tests. Physicians who were male (odds ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.01-1.64), further removed from medical school graduation (odds ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.02-1.04), or in an enhanced fee-for-service payment model (family health group) vs a capitated payment model (family health team) (odds ratio, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.42-2.94) had increased odds of being generalized frequent users. Conclusions and Relevance: This study identified a group of primary care physicians who frequently ordered low-value screening tests. Tailoring future interventions to these generalized frequent users might be an effective approach to reducing low-value care.

Expanding the scope of Critical Care Rapid Response Teams: a feasible approach to identify adverse events. A prospective observational cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Adverse events (AEs) affect 3-12% of hospitalised patients. These are estimates from a labour-intensive chart review process,which is not feasible outside research. Clinical deterioration on the wards triggers a rapid response teams (RRTs) consult and can be used to identify an AE prospectively. OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate the feasibility of using RRT to detect AEs and compare this methodology to the rates reported using an electronic safety reporting system. METHODS: Prospective observational cohort of RRT consults. Three independent physicians reviewed all cases for the occurrence of an AE and its preventability. We summarise AEs as rates per 1000 patient-days, and compared the rates between RRT and the safety reporting system using a Poisson model. RESULTS: There were 8713 hospital admissions, with 531 RRT consults and 247 (2.8%) cases included. Forty-four (17.8%) and 35 cases (14.2%) were judged as AEs and preventable AEs, respectively. RRT identified 0.52 AE/1000 patient-days, compared with 0.21 AE/1000 patient-days detected through the electronic safety reporting system (rate ratio 2.4, 95% CI 1.4 to 4.2, p=0.0014). Patients in surgical wards had more AEs (0.83/1000 vs 0.36/1000, p<0.01) and preventable AEs (0.70 vs 0.21, p<0.01) than patients in medical wards. Agreement for AE (κ 0.46, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.53) and preventable AE (κ 0.47, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.53) was moderate among reviewers. CONCLUSIONS: Reviewing RRT consults identified a high proportion of AEs and preventable AEs. This methodology detected twice as many AEs as the hospital's safety reporting system. RRT clinicians provide a complementary and more sensitive mechanism than traditional safety reporting systems to identify possible AEs in hospitals.

Reducing antimicrobial therapy for asymptomatic bacteriuria among noncatheterized inpatients: a proof-of-concept study.

This proof-of-concept study demonstrates that no longer routinely reporting urine culture results from noncatheterized medical and surgical inpatients can greatly reduce unnecessary antimicrobial therapy for asymptomatic bacteriuria without significant additional laboratory workload. Larger studies are needed to confirm the generalizability, safety, and sustainability of this model of care.

Patient safety in emergency medical services: a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Preventable harm from medical care has been extensively documented in the inpatient setting. Emergency medical services (EMS) providers care for patients in dynamic and challenging environments; prehospital emergency care is a field that represents an area of high risk for errors and harm, but has received relatively little attention in the patient safety literature. OBJECTIVE: To identify the threats to patient safety unique to the EMS environment and interventions that mitigate those threats, we completed a systematic review of the literature. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) for combinations of key EMS and patient safety terms composed by a pan-canadian expert panel using a year limit of 1999 to 2011. We excluded commentaries, opinions, letters, abstracts, and non-english publications. Two investigators performed an independent hierarchical screening of titles, abstracts, and full-text articles blinded to source. We used the kappa statistic to examine interrater agreement. Any differences were resolved by consensus. RESULTS: We retrieved 5,959 titles, and 88 publications met the inclusion criteria and were categorized into seven themes: adverse events and medication errors (22 articles), clinical judgment (13), communication (6), ground vehicle safety (9), aircraft safety (6), interfacility transport (16), and intubation (16). Two articles were randomized controlled trials; the remainder were systematic reviews, prospective observational studies, retrospective database/chart reviews, qualitative interviews, or surveys. The kappa statistics for titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were 0.65, 0.79, and 0.87, respectively, for the first search and 0.60, 0.74, and 0.85 for the second. CONCLUSIONS: We found a paucity of scientific literature exploring patient safety in EMS. Research is needed to improve our understanding of problem magnitude and threats to patient safety and to guide interventions.

Usability evaluation of order sets in a computerised provider order entry system.

BACKGROUND: Computerised provider order entry (CPOE) is an important patient safety intervention that has encountered significant barriers to implementation. The usability of a CPOE system plays a significant role in its acceptance. The authors conducted a heuristic evaluation of a CPOE order set system to uncover existing usability issues prior to implementation. METHODS: A heuristic evaluation methodology was used to evaluate the usability of a CPOE test order set system. There are 10 heuristic principles, such as error prevention, to help users identify and recover from errors. Evaluators included a staff physician with extensive clinical experience, and three engineers with expertise in heuristic evaluation methodology. The results of the heuristic evaluation were used to create a user centred design prototype. RESULTS: 92 unique heuristic violations were found for the CPOE test order set system, including 35 identified by the clinician and at least one engineer, and 57 of the 92 violations (62%) found only by the clinician. All evaluators identified at least one violation of each of the 10 usability heuristics in their analysis of the CPOE system. A user centred design prototype was created to demonstrate changes that could improve usability. INTERPRETATION: The CPOE test order set system had many usability heuristic violations. Many violations were found by a clinician with knowledge of the heuristic evaluation process. Implementation of the CPOE system was deferred and a new user centred design prototype was developed for future study. The authors recommend conducting heuristic evaluations early in the process of designing, selecting and implementing CPOE systems.

Does user-centred design affect the efficiency, usability and safety of CPOE order sets?

BACKGROUND: Application of user-centred design principles to Computerized provider order entry (CPOE) systems may improve task efficiency, usability or safety, but there is limited evaluative research of its impact on CPOE systems. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the task efficiency, usability, and safety of three order set formats: our hospital's planned CPOE order sets (CPOE Test), computer order sets based on user-centred design principles (User Centred Design), and existing pre-printed paper order sets (Paper). PARTICIPANTS: 27 staff physicians, residents and medical students. SETTING: Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, an academic hospital in Toronto, Canada. Methods Participants completed four simulated order set tasks with three order set formats (two CPOE Test tasks, one User Centred Design, and one Paper). Order of presentation of order set formats and tasks was randomized. Users received individual training for the CPOE Test format only. MAIN MEASURES: Completion time (efficiency), requests for assistance (usability), and errors in the submitted orders (safety). RESULTS: 27 study participants completed 108 order sets. Mean task times were: User Centred Design format 273 s, Paper format 293 s (p=0.73 compared to UCD format), and CPOE Test format 637 s (p<0.0001 compared to UCD format). Users requested assistance in 31% of the CPOE Test format tasks, whereas no assistance was needed for the other formats (p<0.01). There were no significant differences in number of errors between formats. CONCLUSIONS: The User Centred Design format was more efficient and usable than the CPOE Test format even though training was provided for the latter. We conclude that application of user-centred design principles can enhance task efficiency and usability, increasing the likelihood of successful implementation.

Influence of noninvasive cardiovascular imaging in primary prevention: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Despite extensive use in practice, the impact of noninvasive cardiovascular imaging in primary prevention remains unclear. METHODS: We searched for randomized trials that compared imaging with usual care and reported any of the following outcomes in a primary prevention setting: medication prescribing, lifestyle modification (including diet, exercise, or smoking cessation), angiography, or revascularization. RESULTS: Seven trials were included. Trials screened patients for inducible myocardial ischemia (2 trials), coronary calcification (3 trials), carotid atherosclerosis (1 trial), or left ventricular hypertrophy (1 trial). Imaging had no effect on medication prescribing overall (odds ratio [OR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-1.33) or on provision of lipid-modifying agents (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.58-2.01), antihypertensive drugs (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.75-1.47), or antiplatelet agents (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.84-1.32). Similarly, no effect was seen on dietary improvement (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.22-2.85), physical activity (0.02 vs -0.08 point change for imaging vs control on a 5-point scale; P = .23), or smoking cessation (OR, 2.24; 95% CI, 0.97-5.19). Imaging was not associated with invasive angiography (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.89-1.79). CONCLUSIONS: We found limited evidence suggesting that noninvasive cardiovascular imaging alters primary prevention efforts. However, given the imprecision of these results, further high-quality studies are needed.