Impact of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Safety Program for Perinatal Care.

BACKGROUND: The Safety Program for Perinatal Care (SPPC) seeks to improve safety on labor and delivery (L&D) units through three mutually reinforcing components: (1) fostering a culture of teamwork and communication, (2) applying safety science principles to care processes; and (3) in situ simulation. The objective of this study was to describe the SPPC implementation experience and evaluate the short-term impact on unit patient safety culture, processes, and adverse events. METHODS: We supported SPPC implementation by L&D units with a program toolkit, trainings, and technical assistance. We evaluated the program using a pre-post, mixed-methods design. Implementing units reported uptake of program components, submitted hospital discharge data on maternal and neonatal adverse events, and participated in semi-structured interviews. We measured changes in safety and quality using the Modified Adverse Outcome Index (MAOI) and other perinatal care indicators. RESULTS: Forty-three L&D units submitted data representing 97,740 deliveries over 10 months of follow-up. Twenty-six units implemented all three program components. L&D staff reported improvements in teamwork, communication, and unit safety culture that facilitated applying safety science principles to clinical care. The MAOI decreased from 5.03% to 4.65% (absolute change -0.38% [95% CI, -0.88% to 0.12%]). Statistically significant decreases in indicators for obstetric trauma without instruments and primary cesarean delivery were observed. A statistically significant increase in neonatal birth trauma was observed, but the overall rate of unexpected newborn complications was unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: The SPPC had a favorable impact on unit patient safety culture and processes, but short-term impact on maternal and neonatal adverse events was mixed.

The Perinatal Birth Environment: Communication Strategies and Processes for Adherence to a Standardized Guideline in Women Undergoing Second-Stage Labor With Epidural Anesthesia.

Key to any perinatal safety initiative is buy-in and strong leadership from obstetric and pediatric providers, advanced practice nurses, and labor and delivery nurses in collaboration with ancillary staff. In the fall of 2007, executives of a large Midwestern hospital system created the Zero Birth Injury Initiative. This multidisciplinary group sought to eliminate birth injury using the Institute of Healthcare Improvement Perinatal Bundles. Concurrently, the team implemented a standardized second-stage labor guideline for women who choose epidural analgesia for pain management to continue the work of eliminating birth injuries in second-stage labor. The purpose of this article was to describe the process of the modification and adaptation of a standardized second-stage labor guideline, as well as adherence rates of these guidelines into clinical practice. Prior to implementation, a Web-based needs assessment survey of providers was conducted. Most (77% of 180 respondents) believed there was a need for an evidence-based guideline to manage the second stage of labor. The guideline was implemented at 5 community hospitals and 1 academic health center. Data were prospectively collected during a 3-month period for adherence assessment at 1 community hospital and 1 academic health center. Providers adhered to the guideline in about 57% of births. Of patients whose provider followed the guideline, 75% of women were encouraged to delay pushing compared with only 28% of patients delayed pushing when the provider did not follow the guideline.

A perinatal care quality and safety initiative: are there financial rewards for improved quality?

BACKGROUND: Although costs of providing care may decrease with hospital initiatives to improve obstetric and neonatal outcomes, the accompanying reduced adverse outcomes may negatively affect hospital revenues. METHODS: In 2008 a Minnesota-based hospital system (Fairview Health Services) launched the Zero Birth Injury (ZBI) initiative, which used evidence-based care bundles to guide management of obstetric services. A pre-post analysis of financial impacts of ZBI was conducted by using hospital administrative records to measure costs and revenues associated with changes in maternal and neonatal birth injuries before (2008) and after (2009-2011) the initiative. RESULTS: For the Fairview Health Services hospitals, after adjusting for relevant covariates, implementation of ZBI was associated with a mean 11% decrease in the rate of maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes between 2008 and 2011 (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.89, p = .076). As a result of the adverse events avoided, the hospital system saved $284,985 in costs but earned $324,333 less revenue, which produced a net financial decrease of $39,348 (or a $305 net financial loss per adverse event avoided) in 2011, compared with 2008. CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of a perinatal quality and safety initiative that reduced birth injuries had little net financial impact on the hospital. ZBI produced better clinical results at a lower cost, which represents potential savings for payers, but the hospital system offering improved quality reaped no clear financial rewards. These results highlight the important role for shared-savings collaborations (among patients, providers, government and third-party payers, and employers) to incentivize QI. Widespread adoption of perinatal safety initiatives combined with innovative payment models may contribute to better health at reduced cost.