Rachel Kohn1,2,3, Vanessa Madden2,3, Jeremy M Kahn4, David A Asch1,3, Amber E Barnato5, Scott D Halpern1,2,3, Meeta Prasad Kerlin1,2,3. 1. 1 Department of Medicine. 2. 2 Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, and. 3. 3 Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and. 4. 4 Clinical Research, Investigation, and Systems Modeling of Acute Illness Center, Department of Critical Care Medicine, and. 5. 5 Section of Decision Sciences, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
RATIONALE: Several intensive care unit (ICU) organizational practices have been associated with improved patient outcomes. However, the uptake of these evidence-based practices is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To assess diffusion of ICU organizational practices across the state of Pennsylvania. METHODS: We conducted two web-based, cross-sectional surveys of ICU organizational practices in Pennsylvania acute care hospitals, in 2005 (chief nursing officer respondents) and 2014 (ICU nurse manager respondents). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 223 eligible respondents, nurse managers from 136 (61%) medical, surgical, mixed medical-surgical, cardiac, and specialty ICUs in 98 hospitals completed the 2014 survey, compared with 124 of 164 (76%) chief nursing officers in the 2005 survey. In 2014, daytime physician staffing models varied widely, with 23 of 136 (17%) using closed models and 33 (24%) offering no intensivist staffing. Nighttime intensivist staffing was used in 37 (27%) ICUs, 38 (28%) used nonintensivist attending staffing, and 24 (18%) had no nighttime attending physicians. Daily multidisciplinary rounds occurred in 93 (68%) ICUs. Regular participants included clinical pharmacists in 68 of 93 (73%) ICUs, respiratory therapists in 62 (67%), and advanced practitioners in 37 (39%). Patients and family members participated in rounds in 36 (39%) ICUs. Clinical protocols or checklists for mechanically ventilated patients were available in 128 of 133 (96%) ICUs, low tidal volume ventilation for acute respiratory distress syndrome in 54 of 132 (41%) ICUs, prone positioning for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome in 37 of 134 (28%) ICUs, and family meetings in 19 of 134 (14%) ICUs. Among 61 ICUs that responded to both surveys, there was a significant increase in the proportion of ICUs using nighttime in-ICU attending physicians (23 [38%] in 2005 vs. 30 [49%] in 2014; P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: The diffusion of evidence-based ICU organizational practices has been variable across the state of Pennsylvania. Only half of Pennsylvania ICUs have intensivists dedicated to the ICU. Variable numbers use clinical protocols for life-saving therapies, and few use structured family engagement strategies. In contrast, the diffusion of non-evidence-based practices, including overnight ICU attending physician staffing, is increasing. Future research should focus on promoting implementation of organizational evidence to promote high-quality ICU care.
RATIONALE: Several intensive care unit (ICU) organizational practices have been associated with improved patient outcomes. However, the uptake of these evidence-based practices is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To assess diffusion of ICU organizational practices across the state of Pennsylvania. METHODS: We conducted two web-based, cross-sectional surveys of ICU organizational practices in Pennsylvania acute care hospitals, in 2005 (chief nursing officer respondents) and 2014 (ICU nurse manager respondents). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 223 eligible respondents, nurse managers from 136 (61%) medical, surgical, mixed medical-surgical, cardiac, and specialty ICUs in 98 hospitals completed the 2014 survey, compared with 124 of 164 (76%) chief nursing officers in the 2005 survey. In 2014, daytime physician staffing models varied widely, with 23 of 136 (17%) using closed models and 33 (24%) offering no intensivist staffing. Nighttime intensivist staffing was used in 37 (27%) ICUs, 38 (28%) used nonintensivist attending staffing, and 24 (18%) had no nighttime attending physicians. Daily multidisciplinary rounds occurred in 93 (68%) ICUs. Regular participants included clinical pharmacists in 68 of 93 (73%) ICUs, respiratory therapists in 62 (67%), and advanced practitioners in 37 (39%). Patients and family members participated in rounds in 36 (39%) ICUs. Clinical protocols or checklists for mechanically ventilated patients were available in 128 of 133 (96%) ICUs, low tidal volume ventilation for acute respiratory distress syndrome in 54 of 132 (41%) ICUs, prone positioning for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome in 37 of 134 (28%) ICUs, and family meetings in 19 of 134 (14%) ICUs. Among 61 ICUs that responded to both surveys, there was a significant increase in the proportion of ICUs using nighttime in-ICU attending physicians (23 [38%] in 2005 vs. 30 [49%] in 2014; P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: The diffusion of evidence-based ICU organizational practices has been variable across the state of Pennsylvania. Only half of Pennsylvania ICUs have intensivists dedicated to the ICU. Variable numbers use clinical protocols for life-saving therapies, and few use structured family engagement strategies. In contrast, the diffusion of non-evidence-based practices, including overnight ICU attending physician staffing, is increasing. Future research should focus on promoting implementation of organizational evidence to promote high-quality ICU care.
Authors: Connie M Ulrich; Marion Danis; Deloris Koziol; Elizabeth Garrett-Mayer; Ryan Hubbard; Christine Grady Journal: Nurs Res Date: 2005 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.381
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Scott D Halpern; Rachel Kohn; Aaron Dornbrand-Lo; Thomas Metkus; David A Asch; Kevin G Volpp Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2011-04-14 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Curtis H Weiss; Farzad Moazed; Colleen A McEvoy; Benjamin D Singer; Igal Szleifer; Luís A N Amaral; Mary Kwasny; Charles M Watts; Stephen D Persell; David W Baker; Jacob I Sznajder; Richard G Wunderink Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2011-05-26 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: William Checkley; Greg S Martin; Samuel M Brown; Steven Y Chang; Ousama Dabbagh; Richard D Fremont; Timothy D Girard; Todd W Rice; Michael D Howell; Steven B Johnson; James O'Brien; Pauline K Park; Stephen M Pastores; Namrata T Patil; Anthony P Pietropaoli; Maryann Putman; Leo Rotello; Jonathan Siner; Sahul Sajid; David J Murphy; Jonathan E Sevransky Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Ashley M Tameron; Kevin B Ricci; Wendelyn M Oslock; Amy P Rushing; Angela M Ingraham; Vijaya T Daniel; Anghela Z Paredes; Adrian Diaz; Courtney E Collins; Victor K Heh; Holly E Baselice; Scott A Strassels; Heena P Santry Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2020-07-05 Impact factor: 3.425
Authors: Emily M Boltey; Theodore J Iwashyna; Robert C Hyzy; Sam R Watson; Corine Ross; Deena Kelly Costa Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2019-03-01 Impact factor: 3.425
Authors: Kelly C Vranas; Jennifer Y Scott; Omar Badawi; Michael O Harhay; Christopher G Slatore; Donald R Sullivan; Meeta Prasad Kerlin Journal: Chest Date: 2020-03-27 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Kelly C Vranas; Jeffrey K Jopling; Jennifer Y Scott; Omar Badawi; Michael O Harhay; Christopher G Slatore; Meghan C Ramsey; Michael J Breslow; Arnold S Milstein; Meeta Prasad Kerlin Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2018-03 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Katherine R Courtright; Erich M Dress; Jaspal Singh; Brian A Bayes; Marzana Chowdhury; Dylan S Small; Timothy Hetherington; Lindsay Plickert; Michael E Detsky; Jason N Doctor; Michael O Harhay; Henry L Burke; Michael B Green; Toan Huynh; D Matthew Sullivan; Scott D Halpern Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2021-02