The ILC Maine statement: Time for the fundamental care [r]evolution.

AIM: The aim of this study was to present the third position statement from the International Learning Collaborative (ILC). The ILC is the foremost global organization dedicated to transforming fundamental care. Internationally, fundamental care is reported to be poorly delivered, delayed or missed, negatively impacting patients, their families/carers and healthcare staff and systems. Overcoming this global challenge requires profound transformation in how our healthcare systems value, deliver and evaluate fundamental care. This transformation will take both evolutionary and revolutionary guises. In this position statement, we argue how this [r]evolutionary transformation for fundamental care can and must be created within clinical practice. DESIGN: Position paper. METHODS: This position statement stems from the ILC's annual conference and Leadership Program held in Portland, Maine, USA, in June 2023. The statement draws on the discussions between participants and the authors' subsequent reflections and synthesis of these discussions and ideas. The conference and Leadership Program involved participants (n = 209) from 13 countries working primarily within clinical practice. RESULTS: The statement focuses on what must occur to transform how fundamental care is valued, prioritized and delivered within clinical practice settings globally. To ensure demonstrable change, the statement comprises four action-oriented strategies that must be systematically owned by healthcare staff and leaders and embedded in our healthcare organizations and systems: Address non-nursing tasks: reclaim and protect time to provide high-value fundamental care. Accentuate the positive: change from deficit-based to affirmative language when describing fundamental care. Access evidence and assess impact: demonstrate transformation in fundamental care by generating relevant indicators and impact measures and rigorously synthesizing existing research. Advocate for interprofessional collaboration: support high-quality, transdisciplinary fundamental care delivery via strong nursing leadership. CONCLUSION: The ILC Maine Statement calls for ongoing action - [r]evolution - from healthcare leaders and staff within clinical practice to prioritize fundamental care throughout healthcare systems globally. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: We outline four action-oriented strategies that can be embedded within clinical practice to substantially transform how fundamental care is delivered. Specific actions to support these strategies are outlined, providing healthcare leaders and staff a road map to continue the transformation of fundamental care within our healthcare systems. IMPACT: Fundamental care affects everyone across their life course, regardless of care context, clinical condition, age and/or the presence of disability. This position statement represents a call to action to healthcare leaders and staff working specifically in clinical practice, urging them to take up the leadership challenge of transforming how fundamental care is delivered and experience globally. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients, service users and caregivers were involved in the ILC annual conference, thus contributing to the discussions that shaped this position statement. WHAT DOES THIS PAPER CONTRIBUTE TO THE WIDER GLOBAL CLINICAL COMMUNITY?: The strategies and actions outlined in this position statement are relevant to all clinical settings globally, providing practical strategies and actions that can be employed to enhance fundamental care for all patients and their families/carers. By outlining the importance of both evolutionary and revolutionary change, we identify ways in which healthcare systems globally can begin making the necessary steps towards radical fundamental care transformation, regardless of where they are in the change journey.

'No more heroes': The ILC Oxford Statement on fundamental care in times of crises.

AIM: To outline the International Learning Collaborative (ILC) Oxford Statement, explicating our commitment to ensuring health and care systems are equipped to meet patients' fundamental care needs during times of unprecedented crisis. DESIGN/METHOD: Discussion paper. The content was developed via a co-design process with participants during the ILC's international conference. KEY ARGUMENTS: We, the ILC, outline what we do and do not want to see within our health and care systems when faced with the challenges of caring for patients during global pandemics and other crises. Specifically, we want fundamental care delivery to be seen as the minimum standard rather than the exception across our health and care systems. We want nursing leaders to call out and stand up for the importance of building fundamental care into systems, processes and funding priorities. We do not want to see the voices of nursing leaders quashed or minimized in favour of other agendas. In turn, what we want to see is greater recognition of fundamental care work and greater respect for the people who do it. We expect nurses to have a 'seat at the table' where the key health and care decisions that impact patients and staff are made. CONCLUSION: To achieve our goals we must (1) ensure that fundamental care is embedded in all health and care systems, at all levels; (2) build on and strengthen the leadership skills of the nursing workforce by clearly advocating for person-centred fundamental care; (3) co-design systems that care for and support our staff's well-being and which foster collective resilience rather than overly rely on individual resilience; (4) improve the science and methodologies around reporting and measuring fundamental care to show the positive impact of this care delivery and (5) leverage the COVID pandemic crisis as an opportunity for transformational change in fundamental care delivery.

Systems initiatives reduce healthcare-associated infections: a study of 22,928 device days in a single trauma unit.

BACKGROUND: "Implementation research" promotes the systematic conversion of evidence-based principles into routine practice to improve the quality of care. We hypothesized a system-based initiative to reduce nosocomial infection would lower the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), urinary tract infection (UTI), and bloodstream infection (BSI). METHODS: From January 2006 to April 2008, 7,364 adult trauma patients were admitted, of which 1,953 (27%) were admitted to the trauma intensive care unit and comprised the study group. Tight glycemic control was maintained using a computer algorithm for continuous insulin administration based on every 2-hour blood glucose testing. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definitions of nosocomial infections were used. Evidence-based infection reduction strategies included the following: a VAP bundle (spontaneous breathing, Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, oral hygiene, bed elevation, and deep vein thrombosis/stress ulcer prophylaxis), UTI (expert insertion team and Foley removal/change at 5 days), and BSI (maximum barrier precautions, chlorhexidine skin prep, line management protocol). An electronic dashboard identified the at-risk population, and designated auditors monitored the compliance. Infection rates (events per 1,000 device days) were measured over time and compared annually using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: The study group had 22,928 device exposure days: 6,482 ventilator days, 9,037 urinary catheter days, and 7,399 central line days. Patient acuity, demographics, and number of device days did not vary significantly year-to-year. Annual infection rates declined between 2006 and 2008, and decreases in UTI and BSI rates were statistically significant (p < 0.05). These decreases pushed UTI and BSI rates below Centers for Disease Control and Prevention norms. CONCLUSIONS: Over 28 months, a systems approach to reducing nosocomial infection rates after trauma decreased nosocomial infections: UTI (76.3%), BSI (74.1%), and VAP (24.9%). Our experience suggests that infection reduction requires (1) an evidence-based plan; (2) MD and staff education/commitment; (3) electronic documentation; and (4) auditors to monitor and ensure compliance.

The role of interventional patient hygiene in improving clinical and economic outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To successfully educate, integrate, and empower nonlicensed personnel in the surgical intensive care unit in the use of a skin care protocol to maintain and improve skin integrity. DESIGN: Observational intervention study. SETTING: Surgical intensive care unit. PATIENTS: Data related to alterations in skin integrity were collected over 4 months, representing approximately 2000 patient-days. A total of 97 specific events representing 121 "areas of concern" were identified by nonlicensed personnel. INTERVENTIONS: Nonlicensed staff members' knowledge in 6 key areas related to pressure ulcer (PrU) development was surveyed before and after implementation of an interventional patient hygiene (IPH) program incorporating comprehensive bathing and incontinence protocols. A unique point-of-use skin inspection tool was used by nonlicensed personnel to communicate areas of concern to licensed personnel (registered nurses [RNs]). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reduction in PrUs and improvement in nonlicensed staff knowledge of facility protocols. MAIN RESULTS: Incidence of new PrUs decreased from 7.14% at baseline to 0% at the end of the study. Nonlicensed staff knowledge increased to 100% in all 6 knowledge areas. CONCLUSION: Implementation of an IPH program incorporating comprehensive bathing and incontinence management resulted in enhanced communication between nonlicensed staff and RNs as well as improved patient outcomes.

Speaking Up for Fundamental Care: the ILC Aalborg Statement.

OBJECTIVE: The International Learning Collaborative (ILC) is an organisation dedicated to understanding why fundamental care, the care required by all patients regardless of clinical condition, fails to be provided in healthcare systems globally. At its 11th annual meeting in 2019, nursing leaders from 11 countries, together with patient representatives, confirmed that patients' fundamental care needs are still being ignored and nurses are still afraid to 'speak up' when these care failures occur. While the ILC's efforts over the past decade have led to increased recognition of the importance of fundamental care, it is not enough. To generate practical, sustainable solutions, we need to substantially rethink fundamental care and its contribution to patient outcomes and experiences, staff well-being, safety and quality, and the economic viability of healthcare systems. KEY ARGUMENTS: We present five propositions for radically transforming fundamental care delivery:Value: fundamental care must be foundational to all caring activities, systems and institutionsTalk: fundamental care must be explicitly articulated in all caring activities, systems and institutions.Do: fundamental care must be explicitly actioned and evaluated in all caring activities, systems and institutions.Own: fundamental care must be owned by each individual who delivers care, works in a system that is responsible for care or works in an institution whose mission is to deliver care. RESEARCH: fundamental care must undergo systematic and high-quality investigations to generate the evidence needed to inform care practices and shape health systems and education curricula. CONCLUSION: For radical transformation within health systems globally, we must move beyond nursing and ensure all members of the healthcare team-educators, students, consumers, clinicians, leaders, researchers, policy-makers and politicians-value, talk, do, own and research fundamental care. It is only through coordinated, collaborative effort that we will, and must, achieve real change.

Sustained Reduction of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia Rates Using Real-Time Course Correction With a Ventilator Bundle Compliance Dashboard.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of practice bundles on reducing ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) has been questioned. OBJECTIVE: To implement a comprehensive program that included a real-time bundle compliance dashboard to improve compliance and reduce ventilator-associated complications. DESIGN Before-and-after quasi-experimental study with interrupted time-series analysis. SETTING Academic medical center. METHODS: In 2007 a comprehensive institutional ventilator bundle program was developed. To assess bundle compliance and stimulate instant course correction of noncompliant parameters, a real-time computerized dashboard was developed. Program impact in 6 adult intensive care units (ICUs) was assessed. Bundle compliance was noted as an overall cumulative bundle adherence assessment, reflecting the percentage of time all elements were concurrently in compliance for all patients. RESULTS: The VAP rate in all ICUs combined decreased from 19.5 to 9.2 VAPs per 1,000 ventilator-days following program implementation (P<.001). Bundle compliance significantly increased (Z100 score of 23% in August 2007 to 83% in June 2011 [P<.001]). The implementation resulted in a significant monthly decrease in the overall ICU VAP rate of 3.28/1,000 ventilator-days (95% CI, 2.64-3.92/1,000 ventilator-days). Following the intervention, the VAP rate decreased significantly at a rate of 0.20/1,000 ventilator-days per month (95% CI, 0.14-0.30/1,000 ventilator-days per month). Among all adult ICUs combined, improved bundle compliance was moderately correlated with monthly VAP rate reductions (Pearson correlation coefficient, -0.32). CONCLUSION: A prevention program using a real-time bundle adherence dashboard was associated with significant sustained decreases in VAP rates and an increase in bundle compliance among adult ICU patients.