Improving the implementation of perioperative safety guidelines using a multifaceted intervention approach: protocol of the IMPROVE study, a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial

Implementation Science

Hub C Wollersheim²  André P Wolff³  Johan Damen³  Gert P Westert²  Gerrit JA Bloo³  Steven Teerenstra¹  Hiske Calsbeek²  Yvette EJJM Emond³ 

[1] Radboud university medical center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Dapartment for Health Evidence, section Biostatics, Nijmegen, The Netherlands;Radboud university medical center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, 114 IQ healthcare, Nijmegen, 6500, HB, The Netherlands;Radboud university medical center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Care, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

关键词: Stepped wedge design;    Perioperative care;    Patient safety;    Multifaceted approach;    Implementation;    Health-care quality indicators;    Guideline adherence;   

Others  :  1139401
DOI  :  10.1186/s13012-014-0198-5

 received in 2014-11-21, accepted in 2014-12-18,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

This study is initiated to evaluate the effects, costs, and feasibility at the hospital and patient level of an evidence-based strategy to improve the use of Dutch perioperative safety guidelines. Based on current knowledge, expert opinions and expertise of the project team, a multifaceted implementation strategy has been developed.

Methods/design

This is a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial including nine representative hospitals across The Netherlands. Hospitals are stratified into three groups according to hospital type and geographical location and randomized in terms of the period for receipt of the intervention. All adult surgical patients meeting the inclusion criteria are assessed for patient outcomes. The implementation strategy includes education, audit and feedback, organizational interventions (e.g., local embedding of the guidelines), team-directed interventions (e.g., multi-professional team training), reminders, as well as patient-mediated interventions (e.g., patient safety cards). To tailor the implementation activities, we developed a questionnaire to identify barriers for effective guideline adherence, based on (a) a theoretical framework for classifying barriers and facilitators, (b) an instrument for measuring determinants of innovations, and (c) 19 semi-structured interviews with perioperative key professionals. Primary outcome is guideline adherence measured at the hospital (i.e., cluster) and patient levels by a set of perioperative Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs), which was developed parallel to the perioperative guidelines. Secondary outcomes at the patient level are in-hospital complications, postoperative wound infections and mortality, length of hospital stay, and unscheduled transfer to the intensive care unit, non-elective readmission to the hospital and unplanned reoperation, all within 30 days after the initial surgery. Also, patient safety culture and team climate will be studied as potential determinants. Finally, a process evaluation is conducted to identify the compliance with the implementation strategy, as well as an economic evaluation to assess the costs. Data sources are registered clinical data and surveys. There is no form of blinding.

Discussion

The perioperative setting is an unexplored area with respect to implementation issues. This study is expected to yield important new evidence about the effects of a multifaceted approach on guideline adherence in the perioperative care setting.

Trial registration

Dutch trial registry: NTR3568 webcite

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Emond et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Anderson O, Davis R, Vincent CA, Hanna GB: Surgical adverse events: a systematic review. Am J Surg 2013, 206:253-262.
• [2]Weiser TG, Haynes AB, Dziekan G, Berry WR, Lipsitz SR, Gawande AA: Safe Surgery Saves Lives Investigators and Study Group: Effect of a 19-item surgical safety checklist during urgent operations in a global patient population. Ann Surg 2010, 251:976-980.
• [3]Haynes AB, Weiser TG, Berry WR, Lipsitz SR, Breizat A-HS, Dellinger EP, Herbosa T, Joseph S, Kibatala PL, Lapitan MCM, Merry AF, Moorthy K, Reznick RK, Taylor B, Gawande AA: for the Safe Surgery Saves Lives Study Group: A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. N Engl J Med 2009, 360:491-499.
• [4]Arbous MS, Grobbee DE, Van Kleef JW, De Lange JJ, Spoormans HH, Touw P, Werner FM, Meursing AE: Mortality associated with anaesthesia: a qualitative analysis to identify risk factors. Anaesthesia 2001, 56(12):1141-1153.
• [5]Andrews LB, Stocking C, Krizek T, Gottlieb L, Krizek C, Vargish T, Siegler M: An alternative strategy for studying adverse events in medical care. Lancet 1997, 349(9048):309-313.
• [6]Damen J, Hagemeijer JW, Van den Broek L, Poldermans D: [Prevention of perioperative cardiac complications in non-cardiac surgery: an evidence-based guideline]. Neth J Med 2008, 152:2612-2616.
• [7]Langelaan M, De Bruijne MC, Baines RJ, Broekens MA, Hammink K, Schilp J, Verweij L, Asscheman H, Wagner C: Monitor Zorggerelatreerde Schade 2011-2012, Dossieronderzoek in Nederlandse Ziekenhuizen. EMGO Instituut/VUmc & NIVEL, Amsterdam/Utrecht; 2013.
• [8]Wagner C, Zegers M, de Bruijne MC: Patiëntveiligheid: onbedoelde en potentieel vermijdbare schade bij snijdende specialismen. Neth J Med 2009, 153:327-333.
• [9]De Vries EN, Prins HA, Crolla RMPH, Den Outer AJ, Van Andel G, Van Helden SH, Schlack WS, Van Putten MA, Gouma DJ, Dijkgraaf MGW, Smorenburg SM, Boermeester MA: for the SURPASS Collaborative Group: Effect of a comprehensive surgical safety system on patient outcomes. N Engl J Med 2010, 363:1928-1937.
• [10]Noordzij PG, Poldermans D, Schouten O, Bax JJ, Schreiner FAG, Boersma E: Postoperative mortality in The Netherlands: a population-based analysis of surgery-specific risk in adults. Anesthesiology 2010, 5:1105-1115.
• [11]Pearse RM, Moreno RP, Bauer P, Pelosi P, Metnitz P, Spies C, Vallet B, Vincent JL, Hoeft A, Rhodes A: for the European Surgical Outcomes Study (EuSOS) group for the Trials groups of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the European Society of Anaesthesiology: Mortality after surgery in Europe: a 7 day cohort study. Lancet 2012, 380:1059-1065.
• [12]Van Klei WA, Hoff RG, Van Aarnhem EE, Simmermacher RKJ, Regli LPE, Kappen TH, Van Wolfswinkel LM, Kalkman CJ, Buhre WF, Peelen LM: Effects of the introduction of the WHO “surgical checklist” on in-hospital mortality. Ann Surg 2012, 255:44-49.
• [13]Inspectie voor de Gezondheidszorg (IGZ): Preoperatief Traject Ontbeert Multidisciplinaire en Gestandaardiseerde Aanpak en Teamvorming. Den Haag: IGZ; 2007.
• [14]Inspectie voor de Gezondheidszorg (IGZ): Standaardisatie Onmisbaar voor Risicovermindering in Operatief Proces. Den Haag: IGZ; 2008.
• [15]Inspectie voor de Gezondheidszorg (IGZ): Postoperatieve Zorg in Ziekenhuizen op Onderdelen Voldoende, Maar Kent nog Teveel Risico’s. Den Haag: IGZ; 2009.
• [16]Nederlandse Vereniging voor Anesthesiologie (NVA)/Nederlandse Vereniging voor Heelkunde (NVvH): Richtlijn Het Peroperatieve Traject. Utrecht: NVA/NVvH; 2010.
• [17]Nederlandse Vereniging voor Anesthesiologie (NVA)/Nederlandse Vereniging voor Heelkunde (NVvH): Richtlijn Het Peroperatieve Traject. Utrecht: NVA/NVvH; 2011.
• [18]Nederlandse Vereniging voor Anesthesiologie (NVA)/Nederlandse Vereniging voor Heelkunde (NVvH): Richtlijn Het Postoperatieve Traject. Utrecht: NVA/NVvH; 2012.
• [19]Grol R, Grimshaw J: From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients’ care. Lancet 2003, 362:1225-1230.
• [20]Grimshaw JM, Thomas RE, MacLennan G, Fraser C, Ramsay CR, Vale L, Vale L, Whitty P, Eccles MP, Matowe L, Shirran L, Wensing M, Dijkstra R, Donaldson C: Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies.Health Technol Assess 2004, 8(6):iii–iv, 1–72.
• [21]Brown CA, Lilford RJ: The stepped wedge trial design: a systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006, 6:54-63. BioMed Central Full Text
• [22]Hussey MA, Hughes JP: Design and analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials. Contemp Clin Trials 2007, 28:182-191.
• [23]Dutch Institute for Health Care Accreditation [http://www.niaz.nl/ziekenhuizen/accreditatie-overzicht/accreditatieoverzicht-ziekenhuizen]
• [24]Dutch Federation for University Medical Centres [http://www.nfu.nl/umc/feiten/]
• [25]Association of Tertiary Medical Teaching Hospitals [http://www.stz.nl/interactieve-kaart.html]
• [26]Grimshaw J, Eccles M, Thomas R, MacLennan G, Ramsay C, Fraser C, Vale L: Evidence (and its limitations) of the effectiveness of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies 1966–1998. J Gen Intern Med 2006, 21:S14-S20.
• [27]Van Sluisveld N, Zegers M, Westert G, Van der Hoeven JG, Wollersheim H: A strategy to enhance the safety and efficiency of handovers of ICU patients: study protocol of the pICUp study. Implement Sci 2013, 8:67. BioMed Central Full Text
• [28]Fleuren MAH, Paulussen TGWM, Van Dommelen P, Van Buuren S: Ontwikkeling MeetInstrument voor Determinanten van Innovaties (MIDI). Leiden: Dutch Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO); 2012.
• [29]Veilige zorg, ieders zorg; Patiëntveiligheidsprogramma GGZ [http://www.veiligezorgiederszorg.nl/over-patientveiligheid/begrippenkader.html]
• [30]Wille JC, Van Den Hof S: Het PREZIES-netwerk; surveillance als kwaliteitssysteem ter preventie van ziekenhuisinfecties. In Praktijkboek Patiëntveiligheid. Edited by Van Everdingen JJE. Houten: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum; 2006:175–186.
• [31]Kroon HM, Breslau PJ, Lardenoye JWHP: Can the incidence of unplanned reoperations be used as an indicator of quality of care in surgery? Am J Med Qual 2007, 22:198.
• [32]Rumball-Smith J, Hider P: The validity of readmission rate as a marker of the quality of hospital care, and a recommendation for its definition. N Z Med J 2009, 122:63-70.
• [33]Ouwens M, Hulsher M, Akkermans R, Hermens R, Grol R, Wollersheim H: The team climate inventory: application in hospital teams and methodological considerations. Qual Saf Health Care 2008, 17:275-280.
• [34]Jones KJ, Skinner A, Xu L, Sun J, Mueller K: The AHRQ Hospital survey on patient safety culture: a tool to plan and evaluate patient safety programs. In Advances in Patient Safety: New Directions and Alternative Approaches. Volume 2: Culture and Redesign. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2008.
• [35]Mazzocco K, Petitti DB, Fong KT, Bonacum D, Brookey J, Graham S, Lasky RE, Sexton JB, Thomas EJ: Surgical team behaviors and patient outcomes. Am J Surg 2009, 197:678-685.
• [36]Neily J, Mills PD, Young-Xu Y, Carney BT, West P, Berger DH, Mazzia LM, Paull DE, Bagian JP: Association between implementation of a medical team training program and surgical mortality. JAMA 2010, 304(15):1693-1700.
• [37]Young-Xu Y, Neily J, Mills PD, Carney BT, West P, Berger DH, Mazzia LM, Paull DE, Bagian JP: Association between implementation of a medical team training program and surgical morbidity. Arch Surg 2011, 146:1368-1373.
• [38]Smits M, Wagner C, Spreeuwenberg P, van der Wal G, Groenewegen PP: Measuring patient safety culture: an assessment of the clustering of responses at unit level and hospital level. Qual Saf Health Care 2009, 18(4):292-296.
• [39]Zorgatlas [http://www.zorgatlas.nl/zorg/ziekenhuiszorg/algemene-en-academische-ziekenhuizen/aanbod/locaties-algemene-en-academische-ziekenhuizen/]
• [40]Campbell MK, Fayers PM, Grimshaw JM: Determinants of the intracluster correlation coefficient in cluster randomized trials: the case of implementation research. Clin Trials 2005, 2:99-107.
• [41]American Society of Anesthesiologists: New classification of physical status.Anesthesiology 1963, 24:111.
• [42]Hulscher MEJL, Laurant MGH, Grol RPTM: Process evaluation on quality improvement interventions. Qual Saf Health Care 2003, 12:40-46.
• [43]Hulscher MJ, Laurant M, Grol R: Process evaluation of change interventions. In Improving Patient Care, The Implementation of Change in Clinical Practice. London: Elsevier; 2005: 256–272.
• [44]Oostenbrink JB, Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FFH: Handleiding Voor Kosten Onderzoek; Methoden en Richtlijnprijzen Voor Economische Evaluaties in de Gezondheidszorg. CVZ, Amstelveen; 2000.
• [45]Nederlands Trial Register [http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/index.asp]
• [46]Grol R: Successes and failures in the implementation of evidence-based guidelines for clinical practice. Med Care 2001, 39(8 Suppl 2):II46-II54.
• [47]Grimshaw J, Eccles M: Is evidence-based implementation of evidence-based care possible? Med J Aust 2004, 180:S50-S51.
• [48]Grimshaw J, Eccles M, Tetroe J: Implementing clinical guidelines: current evidence and future implementations. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2004, 24(Suppl 1):S31-S37.
• [49]Boaz A, Baeza J, Fraser A: European Implementation Score Collaborative Group: Effective implementation of research into practice: an overview of systematic reviews of the health literature. BMC Res Notes 2011, 4:212. BioMed Central Full Text
• [50]Forsetlund L, Bjorndal A, Rashidian A, Jamtvedt G, O’Brien MA, Wolf F, Davis D, Odgaard-Jensen J, Oxman AD: Continuing education meetings and workshops: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009., 2
• [51]Farmer AP, Legare F, Turcot L, Grimshaw J, Harvey E, McGowan JL, Wolf F: Printed educational materials: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008., 3
• [52]Jamtvedt G, Young JM, Kristoffersen DT, O’Brien MA, Oxman AD: Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006., 2
• [53]Wensing M, Grol R: Multifaceted interventions. In Improving Patient Care, The Implementation of Change in Clinical Practice. London: Elsevier; 2005: 256–272.
• [54]Van Bokhoven MA, Kok G, Van der Weijden T: Designing a quality improvement intervention: a systematic approach. Qual Saf Health Care 2004, 12:215-220.
• [55]Wensing M, Grol R: Determinants of effective change. In Improving Patient Care, The Implementation of Change in Clinical Practice. London: Elsevier; 2005: 256–272.