Explaining Matching Michigan: an ethnographic study of a patient safety program

Implementation Science

Julian Bion³  Carolyn Tarrant²  Myles Leslie¹  Mary Dixon-Woods² 

[1] Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, Johns Hopkins University, Medical Institutions, 250 E Pratt Street - 15F, Baltimore, MD 21202, USA;Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, 28 Princess Road West, Leicester, LE1 6TP, UK;University of Birmingham, University Department Anaesthesia & Intensive Care Medicine, N5, Queen Elizabeth Hospital (old site), Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TH, UK

关键词: Healthcare-acquired infections;    Ethnography;    Context;    Improvement programs;    Patient safety;   

Others  :  813541
DOI  :  10.1186/1748-5908-8-70

 received in 2013-03-12, accepted in 2013-06-11,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Quality and safety improvement initiatives in healthcare often display two disconcerting effects. The first is a failure to outperform the secular trend. The second is the decline effect, where an initially promising intervention appears not to deliver equally successful results when attempts are made to replicate it in new settings. Matching Michigan, a patient safety program aimed at decreasing central line infections in over 200 intensive care units (ICUs) in England, may be an example of both. We aimed to explain why these apparent effects may have occurred.

Methods

We conducted interviews with 98 staff and non-participant observation on 19 ICUs; 17 of these units were participating in Matching Michigan. We undertook further telephone interviews with 29 staff who attended program training events and we analyzed relevant documents.

Results

One Matching Michigan unit transformed its practices and culture in response to the program; five boosted existing efforts, and 11 made little change. Matching Michigan’s impact may have been limited by features of program design and execution; it was not an exact replica of the original project. Outer and inner contexts strongly modified the program’s effects. The outer context included previous efforts to tackle central line infections superimposed on national infection control policies that were perceived by some as top-down and punitive. This undermined engagement in the program and made it difficult to persuade participants that the program was necessary. Individual ICUs’ histories and local context were also highly consequential: their past experience of quality improvement, the extent to which they were able to develop high quality data collection and feedback systems, and the success of local leaders in developing consensus and coalition all influenced the program’s impact on local practices.

Conclusions

Improved implementation of procedural good practice may occur through many different routes, of which program participation is only one. The ‘phenotype’ of compliance may therefore arise through different ‘genotypes.’ When designing and delivering interventions to improve quality and safety, risks of decline effects and difficulties in demonstrating added value over the secular trend might be averted by improved understanding of program mechanisms and contexts of implementation.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Dixon-Woods et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Shekelle PG, Pronovost PJ, Wachter RM, Taylor SL, Dy SM, Foy R, Hempel S, McDonald KM, Ovretveit J, Rubenstein LV, Adams AS, Angood PB, Bates DW, Bickman L, Carayon P, Donaldson L, Duan N, Farley DO, Greenhalgh T, Haughom J, Lake ET, Lilford R, Lohr KN, Meyer GS, Miller MR, Neuhauser DV, Ryan G, Saint S, Shojania KG, Shortell SM, Stevens DP, Walshe K: Advancing the science of patient safety. Ann Intern Med 2011, 154(10):693-696.
• [2]Auerbach AD, Landefeld CS, Shojania KG: The tension between needing to improve care and knowing how to do it. N Engl J Med 2007, 357(6):608-613.
• [3]Ting HH, Shojania KG, Montori VM, Bradley EH: Quality improvement: science and action. Circulation 2009, 119(14):1962-1974.
• [4]Pronovost P, Needham D, Berenholtz S, Sinopoli D, Chu H, Cosgrove S, Sexton B, Hyzy R, Welsh R, Roth G, Bander J, Kepros J, Goeschel C: An intervention to decrease catheter-related bloodstream infections in the ICU. N Engl J Med 2006, 355(26):2725-2732.
• [5]Lipitz-Snyderman A, Steinwachs D, Needham DM, Colantuoni E, Morlock LL, Pronovost PJ: Impact of a statewide intensive care unit quality improvement initiative on hospital mortality and length of stay: retrospective comparative analysis. BMJ 2011, 342:d219.
• [6]Marsteller JA, Sexton JB, Hsu YJ, Hsiao CJ, Holzmueller CG, Pronovost PJ: Thompson. A multicenter, phased, cluster-randomized controlled trial to reduce central line-associated bloodstream infections in intensive care units. Crit Care Med: DA; 2012.
• [7]Gawande A: Annals of medicine: the checklist. The New Yorker 2007. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/12/10/071210fa_fact_gawande webcite
• [8]Bosk CL, Dixon-Woods M, Goeschel CA, Pronovost PJ: The art of medicine. Reality check for checklists. The Lancet 2009, 374(9688):444-445.
• [9]Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O: Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q 2004, 82(4):581-629.
• [10]Dixon-Woods M, Bosk CL, Aveling EL, Goeschel CA, Pronovost PJ: Explaining Michigan: developing an ex post theory of a quality improvement program. Milbank Q 2011, 89(2):167-205.
• [11]Wachter RM: Understanding patient safety (2nd. edition): New York. London: McGraw-Hill Medical; 2012.
• [12]Darzi A: High Quality Care for All: NHS next stage review. London: Department of Health; 2008.
• [13]Bion J, Richardson A, Hibbert P, Beer J, Abrusci T, McCutcheon M, Cassidy J, Eddleston J, Gunning K, Bellingan G, Patten M, Harrison D, THE MATCHING MICHIGAN COLLABORATION & WRITING COMMITTEE: 'Matching Michigan': a 2-year stepped interventional programme to minimise central venous catheter-blood stream infections in intensive care units in England. BMJ Qual Saf 2013, 22(2):110-123.
• [14]Benning A, Dixon-Woods M, Nwulu U, Ghaleb M, Dawson J, Barber N, Franklin BD, Girling A, Hemming K, Carmalt M, Rudge G, Naicker T, Kotecha A, Derrington MC, Lilford R: Multiple component patient safety intervention in English hospitals: controlled evaluation of second phase. BMJ 2011, 342:d199.
• [15]Benning A, Ghaleb M, Suokas A, Dixon-Woods M, Dawson J, Barber N, Franklin BD, Girling A, Hemming K, Carmalt M, Rudge G, Naicker T, Nwulu U, Choudhury S, Lilford R: Large scale organizational intervention to improve patient safety in four UK hospitals: mixed method evaluation. BMJ 2011, 342:d195.
• [16]Belongia EA, Knobloch MJ, Kieke BA Jr, Davis JP, Janette C, Besser RE: Impact of statewide program to promote appropriate antimicrobial drug use. Emerg Infect Dis 2005, 11(6):912-920.
• [17]Butcher BW, Vittinghoff E, Maselli J, Auerbach AD: Impact of proactive rounding by a rapid response team on patient outcomes at an academic medical center. J Hosp Med 2013, 8(1):7-12.
• [18]Lauer MS: From hot hands to declining effects: the risks of small numbers. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012, 60(1):72-74.
• [19]Glaser B, Strauss A: The discovery of grounded theory: Hawthorne. NY: Aldine Publishing Company; 1967.
• [20]Dixon-Woods M, Leslie M, Bion J, Tarrant C: What counts? An ethnographic study of infection data reported to a patient safety program. Milbank Q 2012, 90(3):548-591.
• [21]Bate P: Strategies for cultural change. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinneman; 1994.
• [22]Scales DC, Dainty K, Hales B, Pinto R, Fowler RA, Adhikari NK, Zwarenstein M: A multifaceted intervention for quality improvement in a network of intensive care units: a cluster randomized trial. JAMA 2011, 305(4):363-372.
• [23]Marschall J: Catheter-associated bloodstream infections: looking outside of the ICU. Am J Infect Control 2008, 36(10):S172. e5-8
• [24]Dixon-Woods M, Perencevich EN: When counting central line infections counts. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2013, 34(6):555-557.
• [25]Wise ME, Scott RD 2nd, Baggs JM, Edwards JR, Ellingson KD, Fridkin SK, McDonald LC, Jernigan JA: National estimates of central line-associated bloodstream infections in critical care patients. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2013, 34(6):547-554.
• [26]Merzel C, D'Afflitti J: Reconsidering community-based health promotion: promise, performance, and potential. Am J Public Health 2003, 93(4):557-574.
• [27]Sax H, Clack L, Touveneau S, Jantarada Fda L, Pittet D, Zingg W, PROHIBIT study group: Implementation of infection control best practice in intensive care units throughout Europe: a mixed-method evaluation study. Implement Sci 2013, 8(1):24-5908-8-24.