Literature DB >> 25356601

Systemwide change of sedation wean protocol following pediatric laryngotracheal reconstruction.

Elliott D Kozin1, Brian M Cummings2, Derek J Rogers1, Brian Lin1, Rosh Sethi3, Natan Noviski2, Christopher J Hartnick1.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Pediatric laryngotracheal reconstruction (LTR) remains the standard surgical technique for expanding a stenotic airway and necessitates a multidisciplinary team. Sedation wean following LTR is a critical component of perioperative care. We identified variation and communications deficiencies with our sedation wean practice and describe our experience implementing a standardized sedation wean protocol.
OBJECTIVE: To standardize and decrease length of sedation wean in pediatric patients undergoing LTR. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) methodology, we implemented systemwide change at a tertiary care center with the goal of improving care based on best practice guidelines. We created a standardized electronic sedation wean communication document and retrospectively examined our experience in 29 consecutive patients who underwent LTR before (n = 16, prewean group) and after (n = 13, postwean group) wean document implementation.
INTERVENTIONS: Implementation of a standardized sedation protocol. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Presence of sedation wean document in the electronic medical record, length of sedation wean, and need for continued wean after discharge.
RESULTS: The sedation wean document was used in 92.3% patients in the postwean group. With the new process, the mean (SD) length of sedation wean was reduced from 16.19 (11.56) days in the prewean group to 8.92 (3.37) days in the postwean group (P = .045). Fewer patients in the postwean group required continued wean after discharge (81.3% vs 33.3%; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: We implemented a systemwide process change with the goal of improving care based on best practice guidelines, which significantly decreased the time required for sedation wean following LTR. Our methodological approach may have implications for other heterogeneous patient populations requiring a sedation wean.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25356601      PMCID: PMC4465249          DOI: 10.1001/jamaoto.2014.2694

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg        ISSN: 2168-6181            Impact factor:   6.223


  34 in total

1.  Comparative evaluation of the content and structure of communication using two handoff tools: implications for patient safety.

Authors:  Joanna Abraham; Thomas G Kannampallil; Khalid F Almoosa; Bela Patel; Vimla L Patel
Journal:  J Crit Care       Date:  2013-11-23       Impact factor: 3.425

2.  A prospective, observational study of the effects of implementation strategy on compliance with a surgical safety checklist.

Authors:  J A Hannam; L Glass; J Kwon; J Windsor; F Stapelberg; K Callaghan; A F Merry; S J Mitchell
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2013-07-09       Impact factor: 7.035

3.  Methadone: who tapers, when, where, and how?*.

Authors:  Joseph D Tobias
Journal:  Pediatr Crit Care Med       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 3.624

4.  Evaluation of a pharmacist-managed methadone taper*.

Authors:  Katherine J Steineck; Angela K Skoglund; Melissa K Carlson; Sameer Gupta
Journal:  Pediatr Crit Care Med       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 3.624

5.  Face-to-face handoff: improving transfer to the pediatric intensive care unit after cardiac surgery.

Authors:  Jeffrey Vergales; Nancy Addison; Analise Vendittelli; Evelyn Nicholson; D Jeannean Carver; Christopher Stemland; Tracey Hoke; James Gangemi
Journal:  Am J Med Qual       Date:  2014-01-17       Impact factor: 1.852

6.  Novel method for laryngotracheal reconstruction: combining single- and double-stage techniques.

Authors:  Jennifer Setlur; Stephen Maturo; Christopher J Hartnick
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.547

7.  Impact of guideline implementation on transfusion practices in a surgical intensive care unit.

Authors:  Jacob T Gutsche; Zev Noah Kornfield; Rebecca M Speck; Prakash A Patel; Pavan Atluri; John G Augoustides
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth       Date:  2013-09-21       Impact factor: 2.628

8.  Neonatal intensive care unit handoffs: a pilot study on core elements and epidemiology of errors.

Authors:  C Derienzo; R Lenfestey; M Horvath; R Goldberg; J Ferranti
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2013-11-21       Impact factor: 2.521

9.  Daily interruption of sedation in critically ill children: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Nienke J Vet; Saskia N de Wildt; Carin W M Verlaat; Catherijne A J Knibbe; Miriam G Mooij; Wim C J Hop; Joost van Rosmalen; Dick Tibboel; Matthijs de Hoog
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2014-02-13       Impact factor: 2.279

10.  Developing content for a process-of-care checklist for use in intensive care units: a dual-method approach to establishing construct validity.

Authors:  Karena M Conroy; Doug Elliott; Anthony R Burrell
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2013-10-03       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.