Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes After the Introduction of the Medicare Sepsis Performance Measure (SEP-1).

BACKGROUND: Medicare requires that hospitals report on their adherence to the Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Early Management Bundle (SEP-1). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of SEP-1 on treatment patterns and patient outcomes. DESIGN: Longitudinal study of hospitals using repeated cross-sectional cohorts of patients. SETTING: 11 hospitals within an integrated health system. PATIENTS: 54 225 encounters between January 2013 and December 2017 for adults with sepsis who were hospitalized through the emergency department. INTERVENTION: Onset of the SEP-1 reporting requirement in October 2015. MEASUREMENTS: Changes in SEP-1-targeted processes, including antibiotic administration, lactate measurement, and fluid administration at 3 hours from sepsis onset; repeated lactate and vasopressor administration for hypotension within 6 hours of sepsis onset; and sepsis outcomes, including risk-adjusted intensive care unit (ICU) admission, in-hospital mortality, and home discharge among survivors. RESULTS: Two years after its implementation, SEP-1 was associated with variable changes in process measures, with the greatest effect being an increase in lactate measurement within 3 hours of sepsis onset (absolute increase, 23.7 percentage points [95% CI, 20.7 to 26.7 percentage points]; P < 0.001). There were small increases in antibiotic administration (absolute increase, 4.7 percentage points [CI, 1.9 to 7.6 percentage points]; P = 0.001) and fluid administration of 30 mL/kg of body weight within 3 hours of sepsis onset (absolute increase, 3.4 percentage points [CI, 1.5 to 5.2 percentage points]; P < 0.001). There was no change in vasopressor administration. There was a small increase in ICU admissions (absolute increase, 2.0 percentage points [CI, 0 to 4.0 percentage points]; P = 0.055) and no changes in mortality (absolute change, 0.1 percentage points [CI, -0.9 to 1.1 percentage points]; P = 0.87) or discharge to home. LIMITATION: Data are from a single health system. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the SEP-1 mandatory reporting program was associated with variable changes in process measures, without improvements in clinical outcomes. Revising the measure may optimize its future effect. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Psychological Safety in Intensive Care Unit Rounding Teams.

Rationale: Psychological safety is the condition by which members of an organization feel safe to voice concerns and take risks. Although psychological safety is an important determinant of team performance, little is known about its role in the intensive care unit (ICU). Objectives: To identify the factors associated with psychological safety and the potential influence of psychological safety on team performance in critical care. Methods: We performed daily surveys of healthcare providers in 12 ICUs within an integrated health system over a 2-week period. Survey domains included psychological safety, leader familiarity, leader inclusiveness, role clarity, job strain, and teamwork. These data were linked to daily performance on lung-protective ventilation and spontaneous breathing trials. We used regression models to examine the antecedents of psychological safety as well as the influence of psychological safety on both perceived teamwork and actual performance. Results: We received 553 responses from 270 unique providers. At the individual provider level, higher leader inclusiveness (adjusted ß = 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24 to 0.41) and lower job strain (adjusted ß = -0.07, 95% CI, -0.13 to -0.02) were independently associated with greater psychological safety. Higher psychological safety was independently associated with greater perception of teamwork (adjusted ß = 0.30; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.36). There was no association between team psychological safety and performance on either spontaneous breathing trials (incident rate ratio for each 1-unit change in team psychological safety, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.10) or lung-protective ventilation (incident rate ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.04). Conclusions: Psychological safety is associated with several modifiable factors in the ICU but is not associated with actual use of evidence-based practices.

Factors Associated With Nurses' Knowledge of and Perceived Value in Evidence-Based Practices.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how the education and specialty certification of intensive care unit nurses influence patients' outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationships between critical care nurses' education level and specialty certification, their individual psychosocial beliefs about their place on the intensive care unit team (in relation to 3 factors: professional identity, self-efficacy, and role clarity), and their perceptions of evidence-based practices used in the intensive care unit. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was emailed to nurses in 12 adult intensive care units within 6 hospitals in a single, integrated health care system. RESULTS: Of 268 respondents, 180 (71%) had a bachelor of science degree or higher, and 71 (26%) had critical care certification. Compared with noncertified nurses, certified nurses reported greater knowledge of spontaneous breathing trials (4.6 vs 4.4 on a 5-point scale, P = .03) and lung-protective ventilation (4.2 vs 3.9, P = .05). Certified nurses reported significantly higher self-efficacy (4.5 vs 4.3 on a 5-point scale, P = .001) and role clarity (4.4 vs 4.2, P = .05) than noncertified nurses. Certification was also associated with greater perceived value in specific practices (daily interruption of sedation: adjusted odds ratio 2.5 [95% CI, 1.0-6.3], P = .05; lung-protective ventilation: adjusted odds ratio, 1.9 [95% CI, 1.1-3.3], P = .03). Education level was not associated with greater knowledge of or perceived value in evidence-based practices. CONCLUSIONS: Nursing specialty certification was associated with nurses' individual psychosocial beliefs and their perceptions of evidence-based practices in the intensive care unit, whereas education level was not. Supporting nurses in obtaining specialty certification could assist with the adoption of evidence-based practices as a means to improve quality of care in the intensive care unit.