Identification and collection of quality indicators for perinatal care.

We describe the development of a database of quality indicators and outcomes for perinatal care as part of a multi-institutional collaborative quality improvement project, Neonatal Intensive Care Quality 2002. Important principles of developing such a database are also discussed including eligibility criteria that identify high-risk patients without burdening data collectors, clinically important and well-defined measures, development of systems within each hospital to ensure identification of all eligible patients, use of data collectors with knowledge of perinatal care, appropriate design of paper and electronic data-collection tools, multiple pilot tests, and periodic feedback of data to participating hospitals.

Evaluation and development of potentially better practices for perinatal and neonatal communication and collaboration.

OBJECTIVE: The obstetric and neonatal exploratory focus group of the Vermont Oxford Network Neonatal Intensive Care Quality Improvement Collaborative 2002 set out to improve collaboration, communication, and coordination between maternal and neonatal caregivers in 3 areas: the pregnancy at 22 to 26 weeks, measurement of maternal outcomes that are linked with neonatal outcomes, and team performance during high-risk delivery. Antepartum and intrapartum maternal attributes and interventions also were considered important measurements to identify practice variations and their relationship to neonatal outcomes for ongoing obstetric and neonatal collaboration. METHODS: Potentially better practices were developed on the basis of evidence in the literature, expert opinion, and internal analysis at the participating perinatal centers. The potentially better practices include development of local guidelines at each center for the care and counseling of pregnant women who are at risk for delivering at the margin of viability; communication strategies for obstetric and neonatology providers relating to high-risk pregnancy treatment plans; team communication and performance at high-risk deliveries; design of organizational structures and processes that facilitate obstetric and neonatal collaboration; and development of perinatal data to evaluate effects of perinatal practices on maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes. RESULTS: As a result of the project, participating centers developed local guidelines for pregnancies between 22 and 26 weeks, created a cross-center maternal database that currently is being linked to neonatal outcomes, and completed a pilot study on video simulation of neonatal-perinatal team communication. CONCLUSIONS: Increased understanding of practice variation in the management of care for infants who are at the margins of viability, locally developed guidelines, and a focus on improved team communication during delivery can be accomplished with a multicenter collaborative approach.

Management of high-order multiple births: application of lessons learned because of participation in Vermont Oxford Network collaboratives.

OBJECTIVES: The delivery and care of sextuplets is complex. Potentially better practices that were developed as part of the Vermont Oxford Network improvement collaboratives were used to prepare for a sextuplet delivery at Akron Children's Hospital. METHODS: The team used potentially better practices that were learned from the Neonatal Intensive Care Quality Improvement Collaborative 2002 using multidisciplinary teams. There was extensive media coverage of the delivery. RESULTS: The goal was to use nearly all potentially better practices that focused on the goals of reducing nosocomial infection, reducing chronic lung disease, reducing radiograph use, reducing length of stay, reducing blood gas use, promoting nutrition, reducing intraventricular hemorrhage, and enriching family-centered care. The center aimed to use these 97 potentially better practices. Of the 97 possible potential better practices as set by the Neonatal Intensive Care Quality Improvement Collaborative 2002, 96 (99%) were used. CONCLUSIONS: This is a blueprint that any center that is faced with high-order multiple births could use as a reference point to begin planning. The team created a benchmark to achieve in every birth of very low birth weight infants and not just a special situation of high-order multiple births.

Attitudes of obstetric and pediatric health care providers toward resuscitation of infants who are born at the margins of viability.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine the attitudes of a variety of health care providers toward the recommendations that should be made to parents regarding the resuscitation of infants who are born at the margins of viability. METHODS: A written questionnaire was distributed to the medical and nursing staff at 4 tertiary perinatal centers. For each of 5 weekly gestational age intervals from 22 weeks to 26 weeks, 6 days, the health care providers were asked to describe on a scale from 1 to 5 whether they would strongly discourage through strongly encourage resuscitation. They also were queried regarding their comfort with counseling regarding these issues. The attitudes of various groups of providers were compared across weekly intervals. RESULTS: A total of 204 physicians and 539 nurses completed the survey. The majority would strongly discourage, either discourage or strongly discourage, be neutral or recommend, recommend or strongly recommend, and strongly recommend resuscitation during the 23rd, 24th, 25th, 26th, and 27th weeks of gestation, respectively. Obstetric caregivers were slightly less likely than pediatric caregivers to strongly discourage resuscitation from 22 weeks to 22 weeks, 6 days and 23 weeks to 23 weeks, 6 days. There were no significant differences in the recommendations of obstetricians and pediatricians. Pediatric nurses were more likely to strongly recommend resuscitation from 26 weeks to 26 weeks, 6 days and more likely either to discourage or to strongly discourage resuscitation from 23 weeks to 23 weeks, 6 days and to strongly discourage resuscitation from the 22 weeks to 22 weeks, 6 days than their obstetric counterparts. Obstetric nurses were slightly less likely than obstetricians to strongly recommend resuscitation at 26 weeks to 26 weeks, 6 days and less likely to strongly discourage resuscitation from 22 weeks to 22 weeks, 6 days. CONCLUSIONS: The caregivers' recommendations seem to be based logically on the current literature regarding survival and morbidity that is experienced by infants who are born at the threshold of viability. Although there are minor differences, there was a relatively consistent approach among professional groups.

Development of potentially better practices for the neonatal intensive care unit as a culture of collaboration: communication, accountability, respect, and empowerment.

OBJECTIVE: The Vermont Oxford Network (VON) CARE Group was formed in response to the need to create organizational cultures supportive of change and quality improvement. METHODS: The CARE Group consisted of team members from 4 participating neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). All CARE Group members chose to work on multidisciplinary teamwork for the duration of the Neonatal Intensive Care Quality Improvement Collaborative Year 2000. A questionnaire was developed by the CARE Group and administered to the 4 focus group NICUs. The survey focused on 6 domains of the organization: unit coordination, working in the NICU, leadership, management of disagreements, authority, and unit culture. Benchmarking visits were completed to supplement the information found in the survey and the literature. RESULTS: Seven potentially better practices (PBPs) were developed on the basis of the surveys, benchmark visits, and literature reviews. The PBPs include 1) a clear, shared NICU purpose, goals, and values; 2) effective communication among and between teams and team members; 3) leaders lead by example; 4) nurture a collaborative NICU environment with trust and respect; 5) live principled standards of conduct and standards of excellence; 6) nurture competent and committed teams and team members; and 7) commit to effective and positive conflict management. CONCLUSIONS: The CARE Group successfully used quality improvement methods and collaboration to delineate principles and practices of multidisciplinary teamwork.

Implementing potentially better practices for multidisciplinary team building: creating a neonatal intensive care unit culture of collaboration.

OBJECTIVE: Part of the process of deriving and refining the CARE (communication, accountability, respect, empowerment) focus group's potentially better practices (PBPs) for multidisciplinary teamwork was to evaluate and experience the PBPs through implementation. METHODS: The 4 neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) in the CARE focus group each worked with implementation of the PBPs. The choice of initial PBP and method of implementation was left up to each NICU's core team. RESULTS: The experience of each of the PBPs that is reported was selected from only 1 of the NICUs. These are summarized and described in a plan-do-study-act type of format. CONCLUSIONS: There was no ideal PBP with which to start. The intertwined nature of all of the PBPs provided additional opportunities to implement other PBPs. A change seemed to be a matter first of vocabulary, then of tentative acceptance, followed by gradual integration into the culture. Change was facilitated when there was acknowledgment of a need to do things differently by the NICU leadership. Although the validity of the PBPs and their importance in cultural change have yet to be confirmed, once there was a persisting intent to change, the makeup of the NICU culture moved to embrace change as part of its culture.