Barriers and carriers: a multicenter survey of nurses' barriers and facilitators to monitoring of nurse-sensitive outcomes in intensive care units.

AIM: To identify nurses' barriers and facilitators to monitoring of nurse-sensitive outcomes in intensive care units (ICUs), and to explore influential nurse characteristics and work environment factors. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey in three Dutch ICUs between October 2013 - June 2014. METHODS: A questionnaire with questions regarding facilitators and three types of barriers: knowledge, attitude and behaviour. The Dutch Essentials of Magnetism II was used to examine work environments. RESULTS: All 126 responding nurses identified pressure ulcers and patient satisfaction as outcomes that are nurse-sensitive and nurses' full responsibility. Lack of time (behaviour) was perceived as the most prominent barrier, followed by unfamiliarity with mandatory indicators (knowledge), and unreliability of indicators as benchmark data (attitude). Education and clear policies were relevant facilitators. Of nurse characteristics, only regularity of shifts was related to perceived attitude related barriers. The work environment factor "clinical autonomy" was potentially associated with behaviour related barriers.

A multifaceted feedback strategy alone does not improve the adherence to organizational guideline-based standards: a cluster randomized trial in intensive care.

BACKGROUND: Organizational data such as bed occupancy rate and nurse-to-patient ratio are related to clinical outcomes and to the efficient use of intensive care unit (ICU) resources. Standards for these performance indicators are provided in guidelines. We studied the effects of a multifaceted feedback strategy to improve the adherence to these standards. METHODS: In a cluster randomized controlled study design the intervention ICUs received extensive monthly feedback reports, they received outreach visits and initiated a quality improvement team. The control ICUs received limited quarterly feedback reports only. We collected primary data prospectively within the setting of a Dutch national ICU registry over a 14-month study period. The target indicators were bed occupancy rate (aiming at 80 % or below) and nurse-to-patient ratio (aiming at 0.5 or higher). Data were collected per 8-h nursing shift. Logistic regression analysis was performed. For both study end points, the odds ratios (OR) for improvements at follow-up versus at baseline were calculated separately for control and intervention ICUs. RESULTS: We analyzed data on 67,237 nursing shifts. The bed occupancy rate did not improve in the intervention group compared to baseline (adjusted OR 0.88; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 0.62-1.27) or compared to control group (OR 0.67; 95 % CI 0.39-1.15). The nurse-to-patient ratio did not improve (OR 0.72; 95 % CI 0.41-1.26 compared to baseline and OR 0.65; 95 % CI 0.35-1.19 compared to control group). CONCLUSIONS: A multifaceted feedback intervention did not improve the adherence to guideline-based standards on the organizational issues bed occupancy rate and nurse-to-patient ratio in the ICU. The reasons may be a limited confidence in data quality, the lack of practical tools for improvement, and the relatively short follow-up. ISRCTN: ISRCTN50542146.

Are all tissue donors recognised? A cohort study in three Dutch hospitals.

Nowadays, the demand for tissue transplantation has significantly increased. To optimize donor recruitment, the potential availability of tissue donors has to be evaluated. In 2011 we conducted a cohort study in three Dutch hospitals in the Netherlands. The potential amount of eligible tissue donors found, based on medical records in these hospitals is compared to the physician's donation form report. In total 1,342 patient records were analysed. From these records, the donation officers considered 484 patients as a potential tissue donor (36.1 %). Despite the absence of contra-indication, the physician did not recognise 25 % (n = 123/484) of potential tissue donors. Physicians' lack of sufficient knowledge of tissue donation was the main cause of adequately identifying tissue donors. A higher percentage of tissue donors in these Dutch hospitals should be feasible through creating awareness and education regarding tissue donation.

Effect of a multifaceted performance feedback strategy on length of stay compared with benchmark reports alone: a cluster randomized trial in intensive care*.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of applying a multifaceted activating performance feedback strategy on intensive care patient outcomes compared with passively receiving benchmark reports. DESIGN: The Information Feedback on Quality Indicators study was a cluster randomized trial, running from February 2009 to May 2011. SETTING: Thirty Dutch closed-format ICUs that participated in the national registry. Study duration per ICU was sixteen months. PATIENTS: We analyzed data on 25,552 admissions. Admissions after coronary artery bypass graft surgery were excluded. INTERVENTION: The intervention aimed to activate ICUs to undertake quality improvement initiatives by formalizing local responsibility for acting on performance feedback, and supporting them with increasing the impact of their improvement efforts. Therefore, intervention ICUs established a local, multidisciplinary quality improvement team. During one year, this team received two educational outreach visits, monthly reports to monitor performance over time, and extended, quarterly benchmark reports. Control ICUs only received four standard quarterly benchmark reports. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: The extent to which the intervention was implemented in daily practice varied considerably among intervention ICUs: the average monthly time investment per quality improvement team member was 4.1 hours (SD, 2.3; range, 0.6-8.1); the average number of monthly meetings per quality improvement team was 5.7 (SD, 4.5; range, 0-12). ICU length of stay did not significantly reduce after 1 year in intervention units compared with controls (hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.92-1.12]). Furthermore, the strategy had no statistically significant impact on any of the secondary measures (duration of mechanical ventilation, proportion of out-of-range glucose measurements, and all-cause hospital mortality). CONCLUSIONS: In the context of ICUs participating in a national registry, applying a multifaceted activating performance feedback strategy did not lead to better patient outcomes than only receiving periodical registry reports.

Process evaluation of a tailored multifaceted feedback program to improve the quality of intensive care by using quality indicators.

BACKGROUND: In multisite trials evaluating a complex quality improvement (QI) strategy the 'same' intervention may be implemented and adopted in different ways. Therefore, in this study we investigated the exposure to and experiences with a multifaceted intervention aimed at improving the quality of intensive care, and explore potential explanations for why the intervention was effective or not. METHODS: We conducted a process evaluation investigating the effect of a multifaceted improvement intervention including establishment of a local multidisciplinary QI team, educational outreach visits and periodical indicator feedback on performance measures such as intensive care unit length of stay, mechanical ventilation duration and glucose regulation. Data were collected among participants receiving the intervention. We used standardised forms to record time investment and a questionnaire and focus group to collect data on perceived barriers and satisfaction. RESULTS: The monthly time invested per QI team member ranged from 0.6 to 8.1 h. Persistent problems were: not sharing feedback with other staff; lack of normative standards and benchmarks; inadequate case-mix adjustment; lack of knowledge on how to apply the intervention for QI; and insufficient allocated time and staff. The intervention effectively targeted the lack of trust in data quality, and was reported to motivate participants to use indicators for QI activities. CONCLUSIONS: Time and resource constraints, difficulties to translate feedback into effective actions and insufficient involvement of other staff members hampered the impact of the intervention. However, our study suggests that a multifaceted feedback program stimulates clinicians to use indicators as input for QI, and is a promising first step to integrating systematic QI in daily care.

[Possibly fewer donors due to decreasing hospital mortality rates]. / Mogelijk minder donoren door daling ziekenhuissterfte.

Over the past ten years, the mortality rate at the Amphia Hospital in the Netherlands has decreased and the average age at death has increased significantly. This downward trend in hospital mortality rates is a national trend in the Netherlands. In addition, in recent years road traffic fatalities have steadily decreased. Both trends have had a significant impact on the availability of potential organ and tissue donors. Currently the main barriers to donation are the limited number of registrations in the donor registry and obtaining permission from relatives. To achieve the maximum number of donors, several initiatives must be undertaken. These include hospitals encouraging registration in the donor registry, training of professionals in communication skills concerning donation, increasing opportunities for organ donations in the emergency department and recruiting donors extramurally. If no measures are taken, a decreasing number of patients with end-stage organ failure will be able to profit from organ transplantation.

Evaluating the effectiveness of a tailored multifaceted performance feedback intervention to improve the quality of care: protocol for a cluster randomized trial in intensive care.

BACKGROUND: Feedback is potentially effective in improving the quality of care. However, merely sending reports is no guarantee that performance data are used as input for systematic quality improvement (QI). Therefore, we developed a multifaceted intervention tailored to prospectively analyzed barriers to using indicators: the Information Feedback on Quality Indicators (InFoQI) program. This program aims to promote the use of performance indicator data as input for local systematic QI. We will conduct a study to assess the impact of the InFoQI program on patient outcome and organizational process measures of care, and to gain insight into barriers and success factors that affected the program's impact. The study will be executed in the context of intensive care. This paper presents the study's protocol. METHODS/DESIGN: We will conduct a cluster randomized controlled trial with intensive care units (ICUs) in the Netherlands. We will include ICUs that submit indicator data to the Dutch National Intensive Care Evaluation (NICE) quality registry and that agree to allocate at least one intensivist and one ICU nurse for implementation of the intervention. Eligible ICUs (clusters) will be randomized to receive basic NICE registry feedback (control arm) or to participate in the InFoQI program (intervention arm). The InFoQI program consists of comprehensive feedback, establishing a local, multidisciplinary QI team, and educational outreach visits. The primary outcome measures will be length of ICU stay and the proportion of shifts with a bed occupancy rate above 80%. We will also conduct a process evaluation involving ICUs in the intervention arm to investigate their actual exposure to and experiences with the InFoQI program. DISCUSSION: The results of this study will inform those involved in providing ICU care on the feasibility of a tailored multifaceted performance feedback intervention and its ability to accelerate systematic and local quality improvement. Although our study will be conducted within the domain of intensive care, we believe our conclusions will be generalizable to other settings that have a quality registry including an indicator set available. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN50542146.