Facilitating future implementation and translation to clinical practice: The Implementation Planning Assessment Tool for clinical trials.

Implementation assessment plans are crucial for clinical trials to achieve their full potential. Without a proactive plan to implement trial results, it can take decades for one-fifth of effective interventions to be adopted into routine care settings. The Veterans Health Administration Office of Research and Development is undergoing a systematic transformation to embed implementation planning in research protocols through the Cooperative Studies Program, its flagship clinical research program. This manuscript has two objectives: 1) to introduce an Implementation Planning Assessment (IPA) Tool that any clinical trialist may use to facilitate post-trial implementation of interventions found to be effective and 2) to provide a case study demonstrating the IPA Tool's use. The IPA Tool encourages study designers to initially consider rigorous data collection to maximize acceptability of the intervention by end-users. It also helps identify and prepare potential interested parties at local and national leadership levels to ensure, upon trial completion, interventions can be integrated into programs, technologies, and policies in a sustainable way. The IPA Tool can alleviate some of the overwhelming nature of implementation science by providing a practical guide based on implementation science principles for researchers desiring to scale up and spread effective, clinical trial-tested interventions to benefit patients.

Formative evaluation and adaptation of pre-and early implementation of diabetes shared medical appointments to maximize sustainability and adoption.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the many factors that influence implementation of new programs, in addition to their success or failure, is extraordinarily complex. This qualitative study examines the implementation and adaptation process of two linked clinical programs within Primary Care, diabetes shared medical appointments (SMAs) and a reciprocal Peer-to-Peer (P2P) support program for patients with poorly controlled diabetes, through the lens of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We illustrate the role and importance of pre-implementation interviews for guiding ongoing adaptations to improve implementation of a clinical program, achieve optimal change, and avoid type III errors. METHODS: We conducted 28 semi-structured phone interviews between September of 2013 and May of 2016, four to seven interviewees at each site. The interviewees were physician champions, chiefs of primary care, pharmacists, dieticians, nurses, health psychologists, peer facilitators, and research coordinators. Modifiable barriers and facilitators to implementation were identified and adaptations documented. Data analysis started with immersion in the data to obtain a sense of the whole and then by cataloging principal themes per CFIR constructs. An iterative consensus-building process was used to code. CFIR constructs were then ranked and compared by the researchers. RESULTS: We identified a subset of CFIR constructs that are most likely to play a role in the effectiveness of the diabetes SMAs and P2P program based on our work with the participating sites to date. Through the identification of barriers and facilitators, a subset of CFIR constructs arose, including evidence strength and quality, relative advantage, adaptability, complexity, patient needs and resources, compatibility, leadership engagement, available resources, knowledge and beliefs, and champions. CONCLUSIONS: We described our method for identification of contextual factors that influenced implementation of complex diabetes clinical programs - SMAs and P2P. The qualitative phone interviews aided implementation through the identification of modifiable barriers or conversely, actionable findings. Implementation projects, and certainly clinical programs, do not have unlimited resources and these interviews allowed us to determine which facets to target and act on for each site. As the study progresses, these findings will be compared and correlated to outcome measures. This comprehensive adaptation data collection will also facilitate and enhance understanding of the future success or lack of success of implementation and inform potential for translation and public health impact. The approach of using the CFIR to guide us to actionable findings and help us better understand barriers and facilitators has broad applicability and can be used by other projects to guide, adapt, and improve implementation of research into practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02132676 .

'The Hand on the Doorknob': Visit Agenda Setting by Complex Patients and Their Primary Care Physicians.

BACKGROUND: Choosing which issues to discuss in the limited time available during primary care visits is an important task for complex patients with chronic conditions. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted sequential interviews with complex patients (n = 40) and their primary care physicians (n = 17) from 3 different health systems to investigate how patients and physicians prepare for visits, how visit agendas are determined, and how discussion priorities are established during time-limited visits. KEY RESULTS: Visit flow and alignment were enhanced when both patients and physicians were effectively prepared before the visit, when the patient brought up highest-priority items first, the physician and patient worked together at the beginning of the visit to establish the visit agenda, and other team members contributed to agenda setting. A range of factors were identified that undermined the ability of patient and physicians to establish an efficient working agenda: the most prominent were time pressure and short visit lengths, but also included differing visit expectations, patient hesitancy to bring up embarrassing concerns, electronic medical record/documentation requirements, differences balancing current symptoms versus future medical risk, nonactionable items, differing philosophies about medications and lifestyle interventions, and difficulty by patients in prioritizing their top concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care patients and their physicians adopt a range of different strategies to address the time constraints during visits. The primary factor that supported well-aligned visits was the ability for patients and physicians to proactively negotiate the visit agenda at the beginning of the visit. Efforts to optimize care within time-constrained systems should focus on helping patients more effectively prepare for visits. Physicians should ask for the patient's agenda early, explain visit parameters, establish a reasonable number of concerns that can be discussed, and collaborate on a plan to deal with concerns that cannot be addressed during the visit.

Unique factors rural Veterans' Affairs hospitals face when implementing health care-associated infection prevention initiatives.

PURPOSE: Health care-associated infection (HAI) is costly to hospitals and potentially life-threatening to patients. Numerous infection prevention programs have been implemented in hospitals across the United States. Yet, little is known about infection prevention practices and implementation in rural hospitals. The purpose of this study was to understand the infection prevention practices used by rural Veterans' Affairs (VA) hospitals and the unique factors they face in implementing these practices. METHODS: This study used a sequential, mixed methods approach. Survey data to identify the HAI prevention practices used by rural VA hospitals were collected, analyzed, and used to inform the development of a semistructured interview guide. Phone interviews were conducted followed by site visits to rural VA hospitals. FINDINGS: We found that most rural VA hospitals were using key recommended infection prevention practices. Nonetheless, a number of challenges with practice implementation were identified. The 3 most prominent themes were: (1) lack of human capital including staff with HAI expertise; (2) having to cultivate needed resources; and (3) operating as a system within a system. CONCLUSIONS: Rural VA hospitals are providing key infection prevention services to ensure a safe environment for the veterans they serve. However, certain factors, such as staff expertise, limited resources, and local context impacted how and when these practices were used. The creative use of more accessible alternative resources as well as greater flexibility in implementing HAI-related initiatives may be important strategies to further improve delivery of these important services by rural VA hospitals.

Variations in risk perceptions: a qualitative study of why unnecessary urinary catheter use continues to be problematic.

BACKGROUND: Catheter associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) is one of the most commonly acquired health care associated infections within the United States. We examined the implementation of an initiative to prevent CAUTI, to better understand how health care providers' perceptions of risk influenced their use of prevention practices and the potential impact these risk perceptions have on patient care decisions. Understanding such perceptions are critical for developing more effective approaches to ensure the successful uptake of key patient safety practices and thus safer care for hospitalized patients. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured phone and in-person interviews with staff from 12 hospitals. A total of 42 interviews were analyzed using open coding and a constant comparative approach. This analysis identified "risk" as a central theme and a "risk explanatory framework" was identified for its sensitizing constructs to organize and explain our findings. RESULTS: We found that multiple perceptions of risk, some non-evidence based, were used by healthcare providers to determine if use of the indwelling urethral catheter was necessary. These risks included normative work where staff deal with competing priorities and must decide which ones to attend too; loosely coupled errors where negative outcomes and the use of urinary catheters were not clearly linked; process weaknesses where risk seemed to be related to both the existing organizational processes and the new initiative being implemented and; workarounds that consisted of health care workers developing workarounds in order to bypass some of the organizational processes created to dissuade catheter use. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals that are implementing patient safety initiatives aimed at reducing indwelling urethral catheters should be aware that the risk to the patient is not the only risk of perceived importance; implementation plans should be formulated accordingly.

Preventing catheter-associated urinary tract infection in the United States: a national comparative study.

IMPORTANCE: Despite the national goal to reduce catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) by 25% by 2013, limited data exist describing prevention practices for CAUTI in US hospitals and none associate national practice use to CAUTI-specific standardized infection ratios (SIRs). OBJECTIVES: To identify practices currently used to prevent CAUTI and to compare use and SIRs for a national sample of US hospitals with hospitals in the state of Michigan, which launched a CAUTI prevention initiative in 2007 ("Keystone Bladder Bundle Initiative"). DESIGN AND SETTING: In 2009, we surveyed infection preventionists at a sample of US hospitals and all Michigan hospitals. CAUTI rate differences between Michigan and non-Michigan hospitals were assessed using SIRs. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 470 infection preventionists. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reported regular use of CAUTI prevention practices and CAUTI-specific SIR data. RESULTS: Michigan hospitals, compared with hospitals in the rest of the United States, more frequently participated in collaboratives to reduce health care-associated infection (94% vs 67%, P < .001) and used bladder scanners (53% vs 39%, P = .04), as well as catheter reminders or stop orders and/or nurse-initiated discontinuation (44% vs 23%, P < .001). More frequent use of preventive practices coincided with a 25% reduction in CAUTI rates in the state of Michigan, a significantly greater reduction than the 6% overall decrease observed in the rest of the United States. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: We observed more frequent use of key prevention practices and a lower rate of CAUTI in Michigan hospitals relative to non-Michigan hospitals. This may be related to Michigan's significantly higher use of practices aimed at timely removal of urinary catheters, the key focus area of Michigan's Keystone Bladder Bundle Initiative.

Barriers to reducing urinary catheter use: a qualitative assessment of a statewide initiative.

IMPORTANCE: Preventing catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI), a common health care-associated infection, is important for improving the care of hospitalized patients and in meeting the goals for reduction of health care-associated infections set by the US Department of Health and Human Services. OBJECTIVE: To identify ways to enhance CAUTI prevention efforts based on the experiences of hospitals participating in the Michigan Health and Hospital Association Keystone Center for Patient Safety statewide program to reduce unnecessary use of urinary catheters (the Bladder Bundle). DESIGN: Qualitative assessment of data collected through semistructured telephone interviews with key informants at 12 hospitals and in-person interviews and site visits at 3 of the 12 hospitals. The analysis focused on perceptions and key issues identified by hospitals as influencing implementation of CAUTI prevention practices as recommended by the Bladder Bundle initiative. SETTING: Twelve purposefully sampled hospitals in Michigan. PARTICIPANTS: Key informants including infection preventionists, clinical personnel, and senior executives. RESULTS: Common barriers to Bladder Bundle implementation and appropriate urinary catheter use included (1) difficulty with nurse and physician engagement, (2) patient and family request for indwelling catheters, and (3) catheter insertion practices and customs in the emergency department. Strategies to address these barriers were also identified by several of the participating hospitals, including (1) incorporating urinary management (eg, planned toileting) as part of other patient safety programs, such as a fall reduction program, (2) explicitly discussing the risks of indwelling urinary catheters with patients and families, and (3) engaging with emergency department nurses and physicians to implement a process that ensures that appropriate indications for catheter use are followed. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The Bladder Bundle program provides a model for implementing strategies to reduce CAUTI. These findings provide actionable information to inform CAUTI prevention-related activities in hospitals throughout the country.

Preventing hospital-acquired infections: a national survey of practices reported by U.S. hospitals in 2005 and 2009.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-acquired infection (HAI) is common, costly, and potentially lethal. Whether initiatives to reduce HAI--such as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) no payment rule--have increased the use of preventive practices is not known. OBJECTIVE: To examine the use of infection prevention practices by U.S. hospitals and trends in use between 2005 and 2009. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Surveys of infection preventionists at non-federal general medical/surgical hospitals and Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals, which are not subject to the CMS no payment rule, in 2005 and 2009. MAIN MEASURES: Percent of hospitals using practices to prevent central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI), ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), and catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI). KEY RESULTS: Survey response was approximately 70%. More than 1/2 of non-federal hospitals reported a moderate or large increase in CLABSI, VAP and CAUTI prevention as a facility priority due to the non-payment rule; over 60% of VA hospitals reported no change in priority. However, both non-federal and VA hospitals reported significant increases in use of most practices to prevent CLABSI, VAP and CAUTI from 2005 to 2009, with 90% or more using certain practices to prevent CLABSI and VAP in 2009. In contrast, only one CAUTI prevention practice was used by at least 50% of hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Since 2005, use of key practices to prevent CLABSI, VAP and CAUTI has increased in non-federal and VA hospitals, suggesting that despite its perceived importance, the non-payment rule may not be the primary driver. Moreover, while 65% of non-federal hospitals reported a moderate or large increase in preventing CAUTI as a facility priority, prevention practice use remains low.

Introducing the patient safety professional: why, what, who, how, and where?

BACKGROUND: Hospital-acquired complications, such as nosocomial infection, falls, and venous thromboembolism, are well known to be frequent and morbid. Unfortunately, prevention remains challenging. Two widely touted prevention strategies-checklists and reminders-have inherent barriers that limit their use as general solutions to these endemic problems. Likewise, relying upon additional vigilance and efforts of those already caring for patients may guarantee that hospital-acquired complications persist, given the time pressures already constraining bedside clinicians. Consequently, we recommend a new type of clinical role in the hospital setting, the "Patient Safety Professional" (PSP), be considered to ensure that each patient receives individualized prevention strategies to minimize the hazards of hospitalization. THE ROLE OF THE PSP: We envision the PSP would be an APRN who would assess assigned patients for hospital-acquired complications following explicit protocols relevant to a short list of safety targets; prioritize identified complications based on morbidity, mortality, and hospital costs; and develop and implement plans to decrease hospital-acquired complications, in consultation with physicians and staff nurses on the unit. We have recently hired such an individual at our hospital and describe-through several vignettes-what our PSP does on a daily basis. EVALUATION OF THE PSP: The rollout, benefits, and costs of PSPs should be carefully evaluated before widespread dissemination is considered. Process measures and clinical outcomes should be monitored. Physician, nurse, and patient satisfaction also need to be assessed. CONCLUSIONS: Far from replacing the duties of frontline physicians and nurses assigned to care for the patient, we believe that a PSP will strengthen the safety net for hospitalized patients and serve as an expert resource.

The influence of organizational context on quality improvement and patient safety efforts in infection prevention: a multi-center qualitative study.

Patient safety is a healthcare priority worldwide, with most hospitals engaging in activities to improve care quality, safety and outcomes. Despite these efforts, we have limited understanding of why quality improvement efforts are successful in some hospitals and not others. Using data collected as part of a multi-center study, we closely examined quality improvement efforts and the implementation of recommended practices to prevent central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) in U.S. hospitals. We compare and contrast the experiences among hospitals to better understand 'how' and 'why' certain hospitals were more successful with practice implementation when taking into consideration specific aspects of the organizational context. This study reveals that among a number of hospitals that focused on implementing practices to prevent CLABSI, the experience and outcomes varied considerably despite using similar implementation strategies. Moreover, our findings provide important insights about how and why different quality improvement strategies might perform across organizations with differing contextual characteristics.

The importance of leadership in preventing healthcare-associated infection: results of a multisite qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: Healthcare-associated infection (HAI) is costly and causes substantial morbidity. We sought to understand why some hospitals were engaged in HAI prevention activities while others were not. Because preliminary data indicated that hospital leadership played an important role, we sought better to understand which behaviors are exhibited by leaders who are successful at implementing HAI prevention practices in US hospitals. METHODS: We report phases 2 and 3 of a 3-phase study. In phase 2, 14 purposefully sampled US hospitals were selected from among the 72% of 700 invited hospitals whose lead infection preventionist had completed a quantitative survey on HAI prevention during phase 1. Qualitative data were collected during 38 semistructured phone interviews with key personnel at the 14 hospitals. During phase 3, we conducted 48 interviews during 6 in-person site visits to identify recurrent and unifying themes that characterize behaviors of successful leaders. RESULTS: We found that successful leaders (1) cultivated a culture of clinical excellence and effectively communicated it to staff; (2) focused on overcoming barriers and dealt directly with resistant staff or process issues that impeded prevention of HAI; (3) inspired their employees; and (4) thought strategically while acting locally, which involved politicking before crucial committee votes, leveraging personal prestige to move initiatives forward, and forming partnerships across disciplines. Hospital epidemiologists and infection preventionists often played more important leadership roles in their hospital's patient safety activities than did senior executives. CONCLUSIONS: Leadership plays an important role in infection prevention activities. The behaviors of successful leaders could be adopted by others who seek to prevent HAI.

Translating health care-associated urinary tract infection prevention research into practice via the bladder bundle.

BACKGROUND: Catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI), a frequent health care-associated infection (HAI), is a costly and common condition resulting in patient discomfort, activity restriction, and hospital discharge delays. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) no longer reimburses hospitals for the extra cost of caring for patients who develop CAUTI. The Michigan Health and Hospital Association (MHA) Keystone Center for Patient Safety & Quality has initiated a statewide initiative, MHA Keystone HAI, to help ameliorate the burden of disease associated with indwelling catheterization. In addition, a long-term research project is being conducted to evaluate the current initiative and to identify practical strategies to ensure the effective use of proven infection prevention and patient safety practices. OVERVIEW OF THE BLADDER BUNDLE INITIATIVE IN MICHIGAN: The bladder bundle as conceived by MHA Keystone HAI focuses on preventing CAUTI by optimizing the use of urinary catheters with a specific emphasis on continual assessment and catheter removal as soon as possible, especially for patients without a clear indication. COLLABORATION BETWEEN RESEARChERS AND STATE WIDE PATIENT SAFETY ORGANIZATIONS: A synergistic collaboration between patient safety researchers and a statewide patient safety organization is aimed at identifying effective strategies to move evidence from peer-reviewed literature to the bedside. Practical strategies that facilitate implementation of the bundle will be developed and tested using mixed quantitative and qualitative methods. DISCUSSION: Simply disseminating scientific evidence is often ineffective in changing clinical practice. Therefore, learning how to implement these findings is critically important to promoting high-quality care and a safe health care environment.

How active resisters and organizational constipators affect health care-acquired infection prevention efforts.

BACKGROUND: As of October 2008, hospitals in the United States no longer receive Medicare reimbursement for certain types of health care-associated infection (HAI), thereby heightening the need for effective prevention efforts. The mere existence of evidence-based practices, however, does not always result in the use of such practices because of the complexities inherent in translating evidence into practice. A qualitative study was conducted to determine the barriers to implementing evidence-based practices to prevent HAI, with a specific focus on the role played by hospital personnel. METHODS: In-depth phone and in-person interviews were conducted between October 2006 and September 2007 with 86 participants (31 physicians) including chief executive officers, chiefs of staff, hospital epidemiologists, infection control professionals, intensive care unit directors, nurse managers, and frontline physicians and nurses, in 14 hospitals. FINDINGS: Active resistance to evidence-based practice change was pervasive. Successful efforts to overcome active resisters included benchmarking infection rates, identifying effective champions, and participating in collaborative efforts. Organizational constipators-mid- to high-level executives who act as insidious barriers to change-also increased the difficulty in implementing change. Recognizing the presence of constipators is often the first step in addressing the problem but can be followed with including the organizational constipator early in group discussions to improve communication and obtain buy-in, working around the individual, and terminating the constipator's employment. DISCUSSION: Two types of personnel-active resistors and organizational constipators-impeded HAI prevention activities, and several approaches were used to overcome those barriers. Hospital administrators and patient safety leaders can use the findings to more successfully structure activities that prevent HAI in their hospitals.

Catheter-associated urinary tract infection and the Medicare rule changes.

Catheter-associated urinary tract infection, a common and potentially preventable complication of hospitalization, is 1 of the hospital-acquired complications chosen by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) for which hospitals no longer receive additional payment. To help readers understand the potential consequences of the recent CMS rule changes, the authors examine the preventability of catheter-associated infection, review the CMS rule changes regarding catheter-associated urinary tract infection, offer an assessment of the possible consequences of these changes, and provide guidance for hospital-based administrators and clinicians. Although the CMS rule changes related to catheter-associated urinary tract infection are controversial, they may do more good than harm, because hospitals are likely to redouble their efforts to prevent catheter-associated urinary tract infection, which may minimize unnecessary placement of indwelling catheters and facilitate prompt removal. However, even if forcing hospitals to increase efforts to prevent complications stemming from hospital-acquired infection is commendable, these efforts will have opportunity costs and may have unintended consequences. Therefore, how hospitals and physicians respond to the CMS rule changes must be monitored closely.

Qualitative research methods: key features and insights gained from use in infection prevention research.

Infection control professionals and hospital epidemiologists are accustomed to using quantitative research. Although quantitative studies are extremely important in the field of infection control and prevention, often they cannot help us explain why certain factors affect the use of infection control practices and identify the underlying mechanisms through which they do so. Qualitative research methods, which use open-ended techniques, such as interviews, to collect data and nonstatistical techniques to analyze it, provide detailed, diverse insights of individuals, useful quotes that bring a realism to applied research, and information about how different health care settings operate. Qualitative research can illuminate the processes underlying statistical correlations, inform the development of interventions, and show how interventions work to produce observed outcomes. This article describes the key features of qualitative research and the advantages that such features add to existing quantitative research approaches in the study of infection control. We address the goal of qualitative research, the nature of the research process, sampling, data collection and analysis, validity, generalizability of findings, and presentation of findings. Health services researchers are increasingly using qualitative methods to address practical problems by uncovering interacting influences in complex health care environments. Qualitative research methods, applied with expertise and rigor, can contribute important insights to infection prevention efforts.

Preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia in the United States: a multicenter mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine what practices are used by hospitals to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and, through qualitative methods, to understand more fully why hospitals use certain practices and not others. DESIGN: Mixed-methods, sequential explanatory study. METHODS: We mailed a survey to the lead infection control professionals at 719 US hospitals (119 Department of Veterans Affairs [VA] hospitals and 600 non-VA hospitals), to determine what practices are used to prevent VAP. We then selected 14 hospitals for an in-depth qualitative investigation, to ascertain why certain infection control practices are used and others not, interviewing 86 staff members and visiting 6 hospitals. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 72%; 83% of hospitals reported using semirecumbent positioning, and only 21% reported using subglottic secretion drainage. Multivariable analyses indicated collaborative initiatives were associated with the use of semirecumbent positioning but provided little guidance regarding the use of subglottic secretion drainage. Qualitative analysis, however, revealed 3 themes: (1) collaboratives strongly influence the use of semirecumbent positioning but have little effect on the use of subglottic secretion drainage; (2) nurses play a major role in the use of semirecumbent positioning, but they are only minimally involved with the use of subglottic secretion drainage; and (3) there is considerable debate about the evidence supporting subglottic secretion drainage, despite a meta-analysis of 5 randomized trials of subglottic secretion drainage that generally supported this preventive practice, compared with only 2 published randomized trials of semirecumbent positioning, one of which concluded that it was ineffective at preventing the development of VAP. CONCLUSION. Semirecumbent positioning is commonly used to prevent VAP, whereas subglottic secretion drainage is used far less often. We need to understand better how evidence related to prevention practices is identified, interpreted, and used to ensure that research findings are reliably translated into clinical practice.

A multicenter qualitative study on preventing hospital-acquired urinary tract infection in US hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: Although urinary tract infection (UTI) is the most common hospital-acquired infection, there is little information about why hospitals use or do not use a range of available preventive practices. We thus conducted a multicenter study to understand better how US hospitals approach the prevention of hospital-acquired UTI. METHODS: This research is part of a larger study employing both quantitative and qualitative methods. The qualitative phase consisted of 38 semistructured phone interviews with key personnel at 14 purposefully sampled US hospitals and 39 in-person interviews at 5 of those 14 hospitals, to identify recurrent and unifying themes that characterize how hospitals have addressed hospital-acquired UTI. RESULTS: Four recurrent themes emerged from our study data. First, although preventing hospital-acquired UTI was a low priority for most hospitals, there was substantial recognition of the value of early removal of a urinary catheter for patients. Second, those hospitals that made UTI prevention a high priority also focused on noninfectious complications and had committed advocates, or "champions," who facilitated prevention activities. Third, hospital-specific pilot studies were important in deciding whether or not to use devices such as antimicrobial-impregnated catheters. Finally, external forces, such as public reporting, influenced UTI surveillance and infection prevention activities. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians and policy makers can use our findings to develop initiatives that, for example, use a champion to promote the removal of unnecessary urinary catheters or exploit external forces, such public reporting, to enhance patient safety.

Preventing hospital-acquired urinary tract infection in the United States: a national study.

BACKGROUND: Although urinary tract infection (UTI) is the most common hospital-acquired infection in the United States, to our knowledge, no national data exist describing what hospitals in the United States are doing to prevent this patient safety problem. We conducted a national study to examine the current practices used by hospitals to prevent hospital-acquired UTI. METHODS: We mailed written surveys to infection control coordinators at a national random sample of nonfederal US hospitals with an intensive care unit and >or=50 hospital beds (n=600) and to all Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals (n=119). The survey asked about practices to prevent hospital-acquired UTI and other device-associated infections. RESULTS: The response rate was 72%. Overall, 56% of hospitals did not have a system for monitoring which patients had urinary catheters placed, and 74% did not monitor catheter duration. Thirty percent of hospitals reported regularly using antimicrobial urinary catheters and portable bladder scanners; 14% used condom catheters, and 9% used catheter reminders. VA hospitals were more likely than non-VA hospitals to use portable bladder scanners (49% vs. 29%; P=.001), condom catheters (46% vs. 12%; P=.001), and suprapubic catheters (22% vs. 9%; P=.001); non-VA hospitals were more likely to use antimicrobial urinary catheters (30% vs. 14%; P=.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the strong link between urinary catheters and subsequent UTI, we found no strategy that appeared to be widely used to prevent hospital-acquired UTI. The most commonly used practices--bladder ultrasound and antimicrobial catheters--were each used in fewer than one-third of hospitals, and urinary catheter reminders, which have proven benefits, were used in <10% of US hospitals.

An observational study of the effectiveness of practice guideline implementation strategies examined according to physicians' cognitive styles.

BACKGROUND: Reviews of guideline implementation recommend matching strategies to the specific setting, but provide little specific guidance about how to do so. We hypothesized that the highest level of guideline-concordant care would be achieved where implementation strategies fit well with physicians' cognitive styles. METHODS: We conducted an observational study of the implementation of guidelines for hypertension management among patients with diabetes at 43 Veterans' Health Administration medical center primary care clinics. Clinic leaders provided information about all implementation strategies employed at their sites. Guidelines implementation strategies were classified as education, motivation/incentive, or barrier reduction using a pre-specified system. Physician's cognitive styles were measured on three scales: evidence vs. experience as the basis of knowledge, sensitivity to pragmatic concerns, and conformity to local practices. Doctors' decisions were designated guideline-concordant if the patient's blood pressure was within goal range, or if the blood pressure was out of range and a dose change or medication change was initiated, or if the patient was already using medications from three classes. RESULTS: The final sample included 163 physicians and 1,174 patients. All of the participating sites used one or more educational approaches to implement the guidelines. Over 90% of the sites also provided group or individual feedback on physician performance on the guidelines, and over 75% implemented some type of reminder system. A minority of sites used monetary incentives, penalties, or barrier reduction. The only type of intervention that was associated with increased guideline-concordant care in a logistic model was barrier reduction (p < 0.02). The interaction between physicians' conformity scale scores and the effect of barrier reduction was significant (p < 0.05); physicians ranking lower on the conformity scale responded more to barrier reduction. CONCLUSION: Guidelines implementation strategies that were designed to reduce physician time pressure and task complexity were the only ones that improved performance. Education may have been necessary but was clearly not sufficient, and more was not better. Incentives had no discernible effect. Measurable physician characteristics strongly affected response to implementation strategies.

Use of central venous catheter-related bloodstream infection prevention practices by US hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the extent to which US acute care hospitals have adopted recommended practices to prevent central venous catheter-related bloodstream infections (CR-BSIs). PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Between March 16, 2005, and August 1, 2005, a survey of infection control coordinators was conducted at a national random sample of nonfederal hospitals with an intensive care unit and more than 50 hospital beds (n=600) and at all Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers (n=119). Primary outcomes were regular use of 5 specific practices and a composite approach for preventing CR-BSIs. RESULTS: The overall survey response rate was 72% (n=516). A higher percentage of VA compared to non-VA hospitals reported using maximal sterile barrier precautions (84% vs 71%; P=.01); chlorhexidine gluconate for insertion site antisepsis (91% vs 69%; P<.001); and a composite approach (62% vs 44%; P=.003) combining concurrent use of maximal sterile barrier precautions, chlorhexidine gluconate, and avoidance of routine central line changes. Those hospitals having a higher safety culture score, having a certified infection control professional, and participating in an infection prevention collaborative were more likely to use CR-BSI prevention practices. CONCLUSION: Most US hospitals are using maximal sterile barrier precautions and chlorhexidine gluconate, 2 of the most strongly recommended practices to prevent CR-BSIs. However, fewer than half of non-VA US hospitals reported concurrent use of maximal sterile barrier precautions, chlorhexidine gluconate, and avoidance of routine central line changes. Wider use of CR-BSI prevention practices by hospitals could be encouraged by fostering a culture of safety, participating in infection prevention collaboratives, and promoting infection control professional certification.