Cardiac Arrest Quality Improvement: A Single-Center Evaluation of Resuscitations Using Defibrillator, Feedback Device, and Survey Data.

BACKGROUND: High-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation is foundational to cardiac arrest care. Visual feedback devices can improve chest compression quality, but are infrequently used. Quality improvement data were examined to determine whether handheld visual feedback and backboard use improved chest compression quality, whether resuscitation team size affected resuscitation indicators, and whether feedback sources are comparable. METHODS: From August 2019 to December 2020, data from 50 resuscitations were collected using a handheld device (n = 35), defibrillator (n = 23), and surveys (n = 35) and shared with providers. Aggregated and individual case data, along with education and research, were distributed to staff as quality improvement measures. RESULTS: The mean duration of resuscitation was 1080 compressions (SD = 858); there were no differences in the durations of resuscitations that did or did not use handheld feedback; 50% of resuscitations used handheld feedback and had more compressions at target rate (74.68% vs 42.18%, t(21) = 2.99, P = .007). Moreover, 25% of resuscitations used backboards; these had more chest compressions at target depth (72.92% vs 48.73%, t(25) = 2.08, P = .048). Team size was not associated with duration of resuscitation or chest compressions quality. There was no improvement in other quality indicators (leadership, family presence, or debriefing) during the data collection period. Feedback sources (defibrillator and feedback device) had good agreement and correlation (r = 0.77, P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating handheld feedback and backboards improved chest compressions quality. Further work to improve the frequency of device use and to examine their relationship to patient-specific outcomes is needed. Study is needed to find interventions that improve other teamwork metrics, inclusion of family during the resuscitation, referral for tissue donation, and rates of postevent debriefing.

The effects of trained observers (dofficers) and audits during a facility-wide COVID-19 outbreak: A mixed-methods quality improvement analysis.

BACKGROUND: In response to a facility-wide COVID-19 outbreak, our tertiary acute care hospital implemented an evidence-based bundle of infection control practices including the use of audits and trained observers "dofficers" to provide real-time constructive feedback. METHODS: We trained furloughed staff to perform the role of dofficer. They offered support and corrective feedback on proper PPE use and completed 21-point audits during a 4-week intervention period. Audits tracked appropriate signage, placement and availability of supplies (equipment), correct PPE use, enhanced environmental cleaning, along with cohorting and social distancing rates. Audit data was used to provide weekly quality improvement reports to units. RESULTS: Nine hundred and sixty two separate audits recorded 36,948 observations, over 7,696 observer-hours. The most common errors were with environmental cleaning and PPE use; the least common were with regards to equipment availability and cohorting and social distancing. Mean error rates decreased from 9.81% to 2.88% (P < .001). The largest reduction, 22.57%, occurred in the category of PPE doffing errors. CONCLUSIONS: Dofficer led audits effectively identified areas for improvement. Feedback through weekly reports and real-time correction of PPE errors by dofficers led to statistically significant improvements; however, error rates remained high. Further research is needed establish if these relationships are causal.