Literature DB >> 16365469

Effect of increasing the intensity of implementing pneumonia guidelines: a randomized, controlled trial.

Donald M Yealy1, Thomas E Auble, Roslyn A Stone, Judith R Lave, Thomas P Meehan, Louis G Graff, Jonathan M Fine, D Scott Obrosky, Maria K Mor, Jeff Whittle, Michael J Fine.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite the development of evidence-based pneumonia guidelines, limited data exist on the most effective means to implement guideline recommendations into clinical practice.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness and safety of 3 guideline implementation strategies.
DESIGN: Cluster-randomized, controlled trial.
SETTING: 32 emergency departments in Pennsylvania and Connecticut. PATIENTS: 3219 patients with a clinical and radiographic diagnosis of pneumonia.
INTERVENTIONS: The authors implemented a project-developed guideline for the initial site of treatment based on the Pneumonia Severity Index and performance of evidence-based processes of care at the emergency department level. Guideline implementation strategies were defined as low (n = 8), moderate (n = 12), and high intensity (n = 12). MEASUREMENTS: Effectiveness outcomes were the rate at which low-risk patients were treated on an outpatient basis and the performance of recommended processes of care. Safety outcomes included death, subsequent hospitalization for outpatients, and medical complications for inpatients.
RESULTS: More low-risk patients (n = 1901) were treated as outpatients in the moderate-intensity and high-intensity groups than in the low-intensity group (high-intensity group, 61.9%; moderate-intensity group, 61.0%; low-intensity group, 37.5%; P = 0.004). More outpatients (n = 1125) in the high-intensity group received all 4 recommended processes of care (high-intensity group, 60.9%; moderate-intensity group, 28.3%; low-intensity group, 25.3%; P < 0.001); more inpatients (n = 2076) in the high-intensity group received all 4 recommended processes of care (high-intensity group, 44.3%; moderate-intensity group, 30.1%; low-intensity group, 23.0%; P < 0.001). No statistically significant differences in safety outcomes were observed across interventions. LIMITATIONS: Twenty percent of eligible patients were not enrolled, and data on effectiveness outcomes were not collected before the trial.
CONCLUSIONS: Both moderate-intensity and high-intensity guideline implementation strategies safely increased the proportion of low-risk patients with pneumonia who were treated as outpatients. The high-intensity strategy was most effective for increasing the performance of the recommended processes of care for outpatients and inpatients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16365469     DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-143-12-200512200-00006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  53 in total

1.  The use of three strategies to improve quality of care at a national level.

Authors:  Jeannette P P So; James G Wright
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Processes of care and outcomes for community-acquired pneumonia.

Authors:  Jonathan S Lee; Brian A Primack; Maria K Mor; Roslyn A Stone; D Scott Obrosky; Donald M Yealy; Michael J Fine
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  2011-10-13       Impact factor: 4.965

3.  Infectious Diseases Society of America/American Thoracic Society consensus guidelines on the management of community-acquired pneumonia in adults.

Authors:  Lionel A Mandell; Richard G Wunderink; Antonio Anzueto; John G Bartlett; G Douglas Campbell; Nathan C Dean; Scott F Dowell; Thomas M File; Daniel M Musher; Michael S Niederman; Antonio Torres; Cynthia G Whitney
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2007-03-01       Impact factor: 9.079

4.  Dissemination of the CDC's Hand Hygiene Guideline and impact on infection rates.

Authors:  Elaine L Larson; Dave Quiros; Susan X Lin
Journal:  Am J Infect Control       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 2.918

5.  Patient and Hospitalization Characteristics Associated With Increased Postacute Care Facility Discharges From US Hospitals.

Authors:  Robert E Burke; Elizabeth Juarez-Colunga; Cari Levy; Allan V Prochazka; Eric A Coleman; Adit A Ginde
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Quality of care for acute asthma in 63 US emergency departments.

Authors:  Chu-Lin Tsai; Ashley F Sullivan; James A Gordon; Rainu Kaushal; David J Magid; David Blumenthal; Carlos A Camargo
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2008-12-13       Impact factor: 10.793

7.  Do hospitals provide lower quality of care to black patients for pneumonia?

Authors:  Florian B Mayr; Sachin Yende; Gina D'Angelo; Amber E Barnato; John A Kellum; Lisa Weissfeld; Donald M Yealy; Michael C Reade; Eric B Milbrandt; Derek C Angus
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 7.598

8.  Risk prediction with procalcitonin and clinical rules in community-acquired pneumonia.

Authors:  David T Huang; Lisa A Weissfeld; John A Kellum; Donald M Yealy; Lan Kong; Michael Martino; Derek C Angus
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2008-03-17       Impact factor: 5.721

9.  Which patients with lower respiratory tract infections need inpatient treatment? Perceptions of physicians, nurses, patients and relatives.

Authors:  Claudia Baehni; Sabine Meier; Pamela Spreiter; Ursula Schild; Katharina Regez; Rita Bossart; Robert Thomann; Claudine Falconnier; Mirjam Christ-Crain; Sabina De Geest; Beat Müller; Philipp Schuetz
Journal:  BMC Pulm Med       Date:  2010-03-11       Impact factor: 3.317

10.  How to derive and validate clinical prediction models for use in intensive care medicine.

Authors:  José Labarère; Bertrand Renaud; Renaud Bertrand; Michael J Fine
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 17.440

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.