OBJECTIVE: To improve patient safety by increasing heparin thromboprophylaxis for medical-surgical intensive care unit patients using a multiple-method approach to evidence-based guideline development and implementation. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal observational study. SETTING: Medical-surgical intensive care unit. PARTICIPANTS: Multidisciplinary clinicians caring for critically ill patients in a 15-bed medical-surgical closed intensive care unit. INTERVENTIONS: Phase 1 was a 3-month baseline period during which we documented anticoagulation and mechanical thromboprophylaxis. Phase 2 was a 1-yr period in which we implemented a thromboprophylaxis guideline using a) interactive multidisciplinary educational in-services; b) verbal reminders to the intensive care unit team; c) computerized daily nurse recording of thromboprophylaxis; d) weekly graphic feedback to individual intensivists on guideline adherence; and e) publicly displayed graphic feedback on group performance. Phase 3 was a 3-month follow-up period 10 months later, during which we documented thromboprophylaxis. Computerized daily nurse recording of thromboprophylaxis continued in this period. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Intensive care unit and hospital mortality rates were similar across phases, although patients in phase 2 had higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores than patients in phases 1 and 3. The proportion (median % [interquartile range]) of intensive care unit patient-days of heparin thromboprophylaxis in phases 1, 2, and 3 was 60.0 (0, 100), 90.9 (50, 100), and 100.0 (60, 100), respectively (p=.01). The proportion (median % [interquartile range]) of days during which heparin thromboprophylaxis was omitted in error in phases 1, 2, and 3 was 20 (0, 53.8), 0 (0, 6.3), and 0 (0, 0), respectively (p<.001). CONCLUSIONS: After development and implementation of an evidence-based thromboprophylaxis guideline, we found significantly more patients receiving heparin thromboprophylaxis. Guideline adherence was maintained 1 yr later. Further research is needed on which are the most effective strategies to implement patient safety initiatives in the intensive care unit.
OBJECTIVE: To improve patient safety by increasing heparin thromboprophylaxis for medical-surgical intensive care unit patients using a multiple-method approach to evidence-based guideline development and implementation. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal observational study. SETTING: Medical-surgical intensive care unit. PARTICIPANTS: Multidisciplinary clinicians caring for critically illpatients in a 15-bed medical-surgical closed intensive care unit. INTERVENTIONS: Phase 1 was a 3-month baseline period during which we documented anticoagulation and mechanical thromboprophylaxis. Phase 2 was a 1-yr period in which we implemented a thromboprophylaxis guideline using a) interactive multidisciplinary educational in-services; b) verbal reminders to the intensive care unit team; c) computerized daily nurse recording of thromboprophylaxis; d) weekly graphic feedback to individual intensivists on guideline adherence; and e) publicly displayed graphic feedback on group performance. Phase 3 was a 3-month follow-up period 10 months later, during which we documented thromboprophylaxis. Computerized daily nurse recording of thromboprophylaxis continued in this period. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Intensive care unit and hospital mortality rates were similar across phases, although patients in phase 2 had higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores than patients in phases 1 and 3. The proportion (median % [interquartile range]) of intensive care unit patient-days of heparin thromboprophylaxis in phases 1, 2, and 3 was 60.0 (0, 100), 90.9 (50, 100), and 100.0 (60, 100), respectively (p=.01). The proportion (median % [interquartile range]) of days during which heparin thromboprophylaxis was omitted in error in phases 1, 2, and 3 was 20 (0, 53.8), 0 (0, 6.3), and 0 (0, 0), respectively (p<.001). CONCLUSIONS: After development and implementation of an evidence-based thromboprophylaxis guideline, we found significantly more patients receiving heparin thromboprophylaxis. Guideline adherence was maintained 1 yr later. Further research is needed on which are the most effective strategies to implement patient safety initiatives in the intensive care unit.
Authors: M Bodí; M Olona; M C Martín; R Alceaga; J C Rodríguez; E Corral; J M Pérez Villares; G Sirgo Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2015-04-14 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Menaka Pai; Nancy S Lloyd; Ji Cheng; Lehana Thabane; Frederick A Spencer; Deborah J Cook; R Brian Haynes; Holger J Schünemann; James D Douketis Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2013-01-02 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Maité Garrouste-Orgeas; François Philippart; Cédric Bruel; Adeline Max; Nicolas Lau; B Misset Journal: Ann Intensive Care Date: 2012-02-16 Impact factor: 6.925
Authors: François Lauzier; John Muscedere; Eric Deland; Demetrios Jim Kutsogiannis; Michael Jacka; Diane Heels-Ansdell; Mark Crowther; Rodrigo Cartin-Ceba; Michael J Cox; Nicole Zytaruk; Denise Foster; Tasnim Sinuff; France Clarke; Patrica Thompson; Steven Hanna; Deborah Cook Journal: Crit Care Date: 2014-04-25 Impact factor: 9.097