BACKGROUND: Corporate performance-improvement methodologies can outperform traditional ones in addressing ICU-based adverse events. My colleagues and I used Six Sigma methodology to address our catheter-related bloodstream infection (CR-BSI) rate, which considerably exceeded the nationally established median over a 9-year period. We hypothesized that use of Six Sigma methodology would result in a substantial and sustainable decrease in our CR-BSI rate. STUDY DESIGN: All patients were directly cared for by a geographically localized surgical ICU team in an academic tertiary referral center. CR-BSIs were identified by infection control staff using CDC definitions. Personnel trained in Six Sigma techniques facilitated performance-improvement efforts. Interventions included barrier precaution kits, new policies for catheter changes over guide wires, adoption of a new site-preparation antiseptic, direct attending supervision of catheter insertions, video training for housestaff, and increased frequency of dressing changes. After additional data analysis, chlorhexidine-silver catheters were used selectively in high-risk patients. The impact of interventions was assessed by monitoring the number of catheters placed between CR-BSIs. RESULTS: Before the intervention period, 27 catheters were placed, on average, between individual CR-BSIs, a CR-BSI rate of 11 per 1,000 catheter days. After all operations were implemented, 175 catheters were placed between line infections, and average CR-BSI rate of 1.7/1,000 catheter days, a 650% improvement (p < 0.0001). Compared with historic controls, adoption of chlorhexidine-silver catheters in high-risk patients had a considerable impact (50% reduction; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This represents the first successful application of Six Sigma corporate performance-improvement method impacting purely clinical outcomes. CR-BSI reduction was highly substantial and sustained after other traditional strategies had failed.
BACKGROUND: Corporate performance-improvement methodologies can outperform traditional ones in addressing ICU-based adverse events. My colleagues and I used Six Sigma methodology to address our catheter-related bloodstream infection (CR-BSI) rate, which considerably exceeded the nationally established median over a 9-year period. We hypothesized that use of Six Sigma methodology would result in a substantial and sustainable decrease in our CR-BSI rate. STUDY DESIGN: All patients were directly cared for by a geographically localized surgical ICU team in an academic tertiary referral center. CR-BSIs were identified by infection control staff using CDC definitions. Personnel trained in Six Sigma techniques facilitated performance-improvement efforts. Interventions included barrier precaution kits, new policies for catheter changes over guide wires, adoption of a new site-preparation antiseptic, direct attending supervision of catheter insertions, video training for housestaff, and increased frequency of dressing changes. After additional data analysis, chlorhexidine-silver catheters were used selectively in high-risk patients. The impact of interventions was assessed by monitoring the number of catheters placed between CR-BSIs. RESULTS: Before the intervention period, 27 catheters were placed, on average, between individual CR-BSIs, a CR-BSI rate of 11 per 1,000 catheter days. After all operations were implemented, 175 catheters were placed between line infections, and average CR-BSI rate of 1.7/1,000 catheter days, a 650% improvement (p < 0.0001). Compared with historic controls, adoption of chlorhexidine-silver catheters in high-risk patients had a considerable impact (50% reduction; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This represents the first successful application of Six Sigma corporate performance-improvement method impacting purely clinical outcomes. CR-BSI reduction was highly substantial and sustained after other traditional strategies had failed.
Authors: Thomas R Campion; Addison K May; Lemuel R Waitman; Asli Ozdas; Cynthia S Gadd Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2010-03-30 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Naomi P O'Grady; Mary Alexander; Lillian A Burns; E Patchen Dellinger; Jeffrey Garland; Stephen O Heard; Pamela A Lipsett; Henry Masur; Leonard A Mermel; Michele L Pearson; Issam I Raad; Adrienne G Randolph; Mark E Rupp; Sanjay Saint Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Naomi P O'Grady; Mary Alexander; Lillian A Burns; E Patchen Dellinger; Jeffrey Garland; Stephen O Heard; Pamela A Lipsett; Henry Masur; Leonard A Mermel; Michele L Pearson; Issam I Raad; Adrienne G Randolph; Mark E Rupp; Sanjay Saint Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2011-04-01 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Teryl K Nuckols; Emmett Keeler; Sally C Morton; Laura Anderson; Brian Doyle; Marika Booth; Roberta Shanman; Jonathan Grein; Paul Shekelle Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2016-12-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Ansaar T Rai; Matthew S Smith; SoHyun Boo; Abdul R Tarabishy; Gerald R Hobbs; Jeffrey S Carpenter Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2016-01-11 Impact factor: 5.836