Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background. Hand hygiene is a key measure in preventing infections. We evaluated healthcare worker (HCW) hand hygiene with the use of remote video auditing with and without feedback. Methods. The study was conducted in an 17-bed intensive care unit from June 2008 through June 2010. We placed cameras with views of every sink and hand sanitizer dispenser to record hand hygiene of HCWs. Sensors in doorways identified when an individual(s) entered/exited. When video auditors observed a HCW performing hand hygiene upon entering/exiting, they assigned a pass; if not, a fail was assigned. Hand hygiene was measured during a 16-week period of remote video auditing without feedback and a 91-week period with feedback of data. Performance feedback was continuously displayed on electronic boards mounted within the hallways, and summary reports were delivered to supervisors by electronic mail. Results. During the 16-week prefeedback period, hand hygiene rates were less than 10% (3933/60 542) and in the 16-week postfeedback period it was 81.6% (59 627/73 080). The increase was maintained through 75 weeks at 87.9% (262 826/298 860). Conclusions. The data suggest that remote video auditing combined with feedback produced a significant and sustained improvement in hand hygiene.

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND We designed a continuing medical education (CME) program to teach primary care physicians (PCP) how to engage in cancer risk communication and shared decision making with patients who have limited health literacy (HL). OBJECTIVE We evaluated whether training PCPs, in addition to audit-feedback, improves their communication behaviors and increases cancer screening among patients with limited HL to a greater extent than only providing clinical performance feedback. DESIGN Four-year cluster randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS Eighteen PCPs and 168 patients with limited HL who were overdue for colorectal/breast/cervical cancer screening. INTERVENTIONS Communication intervention PCPs received skills training that included standardized patient (SP) feedback on counseling behaviors. All PCPs underwent chart audits of patients’ screening status semiannually up to 24 months and received two annual performance feedback reports. MAIN MEASURES PCPs experienced three unannounced SP encounters during which SPs rated PCP communication behaviors. We examined between-group differences in changes in SP ratings and patient knowledge of cancer screening guidelines over 12 months; and changes in patient cancer screening rates over 24 months. KEY RESULTS There were no group differences in SP ratings of physician communication at baseline. At follow-up, communication intervention PCPs were rated higher in general communication about cancer risks and shared decision making related to colorectal cancer screening compared to PCPs who only received performance feedback. Screening rates increased among patients of PCPs in both groups; however, there were no between-group differences in screening rates except for mammography. The communication intervention did not improve patient cancer screening knowledge. CONCLUSION Compared to audit and feedback alone, including PCP communication training increases PCP patient-centered counseling behaviors, but not cancer screening among patients with limited HL. Larger studies must be conducted to determine whether lack of changes in cancer screening were due to clinic/patient sample size versus ineffectiveness of communication training to change outcomes.

Information about the variation in the risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and in prophylaxis practices around the world is scarce. The ENDORSE (Epidemiologic International Day for the Evaluation of Patients at Risk for Venous Thromboembolism in the Acute Hospital Care Setting) study is a multinational cross-sectional survey designed to assess the prevalence of VTE risk in the acute hospital care setting, and to determine the proportion of at-risk patients who receive effective prophylaxis. All hospital inpatients aged 40 years or over admitted to a medical ward, or those aged 18 years or over admitted to a surgical ward, in 358 hospitals across 32 countries were assessed for risk of VTE on the basis of hospital chart review. The 2004 American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) evidence-based consensus guidelines were used to assess VTE risk and to determine whether patients were receiving recommended prophylaxis. 68 183 patients were enrolled; 30 827 (45%) were categorised as surgical, and 37 356 (55%) as medical. On the basis of ACCP criteria, 35 329 (51·8%; 95% CI 51·4–52·2; between-country range 35·6–72·6) patients were judged to be at risk for VTE, including 19 842 (64·4%; 63·8–64·9; 44·1–80·2) surgical patients and 15 487 (41·5%; 41·0–42·0; 21·1–71·2) medical patients. Of the surgical patients at risk, 11 613 (58·5%; 57·8–59·2; 0·2–92·1) received ACCP-recommended VTE prophylaxis, compared with 6119 (39·5%; 38·7–40·3; 3·1–70·4) at-risk medical patients. A large proportion of hospitalised patients are at risk for VTE, but there is a low rate of appropriate prophylaxis. Our data reinforce the rationale for the use of hospital-wide strategies to assess patients' VTE risk and to implement measures that ensure that at-risk patients receive appropriate prophylaxis.

Background Audit and feedback (A&F) is more effective if it facilitates action planning, but little is known about how best to do this. We developed an electronic A&F intervention with an action implementation toolbox to improve pain management in intensive care units (ICUs); the toolbox contained suggested actions for improvement. A head-to-head randomised trial demonstrated that the toolbox moderately increased the intervention’s effectiveness when compared with A&F only. Objective To understand the mechanisms through which A&F with action implementation toolbox facilitates action planning by ICUs to increase A&F effectiveness. Methods We extracted all individual actions from action plans developed by ICUs that received A&F with ( n  = 10) and without ( n  = 11) toolbox for 6 months and classified them using Clinical Performance Feedback Intervention Theory. We held semi-structured interviews with participants during the trial. We compared the number and type of planned and completed actions between study groups and explored barriers and facilitators to effective action planning. Results ICUs with toolbox planned more actions directly aimed at improving practice ( p  = 0.037) and targeted a wider range of practice determinants compared to ICUs without toolbox. ICUs with toolbox also completed more actions during the study period, but not significantly ( p  = 0.142). ICUs without toolbox reported more difficulties in identifying what actions they could take. Regardless of the toolbox, all ICUs still experienced barriers relating to the feedback (low controllability, accuracy) and organisational context (competing priorities, resources, cost). Conclusions The toolbox helped health professionals to broaden their mindset about actions they could take to change clinical practice. Without the toolbox, professionals tended to focus more on feedback verification and exploring solutions without developing intentions for actual change. All feedback recipients experienced organisational barriers that inhibited eventual completion of actions. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02922101 . Registered on 26 September 2016.

Research into adverse events (AEs) has highlighted the need to improve patient safety. AEs are unintended injuries or complications resulting in death, disability or prolonged hospital stay that arise from health care management. We estimated the incidence of AEs among patients in Canadian acute care hospitals. We randomly selected 1 teaching, 1 large community and 2 small community hospitals in each of 5 provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia) and reviewed a random sample of charts for nonpsychiatric, nonobstetric adult patients in each hospital for the fiscal year 2000. Trained reviewers screened all eligible charts, and physicians reviewed the positively screened charts to identify AEs and determine their preventability. At least 1 screening criterion was identified in 1527 (40.8%) of 3745 charts. The physician reviewers identified AEs in 255 of the charts. After adjustment for the sampling strategy, the AE rate was 7.5 per 100 hospital admissions (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.7- 9.3). Among the patients with AEs, events judged to be preventable occurred in 36.9% (95% CI 32.0%-41.8%) and death in 20.8% (95% CI 7.8%-33.8%). Physician reviewers estimated that 1521 additional hospital days were associated with AEs. Although men and women experienced equal rates of AEs, patients who had AEs were significantly older than those who did not (mean age [and standard deviation] 64.9 [16.7] v. 62.0 [18.4] years; p = 0.016). The overall incidence rate of AEs of 7.5% in our study suggests that, of the almost 2.5 million annual hospital admissions in Canada similar to the type studied, about 185 000 are associated with an AE and close to 70 000 of these are potentially preventable.

BACKGROUND:Hip fracture is the most common serious injury of older people. The UK National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) was launched in 2007 as a national collaborative, clinician-led audit initiative to improve the quality of hip fracture care, but has not yet been externally evaluated. METHODS:We used routinely collected data on 471,590 older people (aged 60 years and older) admitted with a hip fracture to National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in England between 2003 and 2011. The main variables of interest were the use of early surgery (on day of admission, or day after) and mortality at 30 days from admission. We compared time trends in the periods 2003–2007 and 2007–2011 (before and after the launch of the NHFD), using Poisson regression models to adjust for demographic changes. FINDINGS:The number of hospitals participating in the NHFD increased from 11 in 2007 to 175 in 2011. From 2007 to 2011, the rate of early surgery increased from 54.5% to 71.3%, whereas the rate had remained stable over the period 2003–2007. Thirty-day mortality fell from 10.9% to 8.5%, compared with a small reduction from 11.5% to 10.9% previously. The annual relative reduction in adjusted 30-day mortality was 1.8% per year in the period 2003–2007, compared with 7.6% per year over 2007–2011 (P<0.001 for the difference). INTERPRETATION:The launch of a national clinician-led audit initiative was associated with substantial improvements in care and survival of older people with hip fracture in England.

ImportanceCompliance with the surgical safety checklist during operative procedures has been shown to reduce inhospital mortality and complications but proper execution by the surgical team remains elusive.ObjectiveWe evaluated the impact of remote video auditing with real-time provider feedback on checklist compliance during sign-in, time-out and sign-out and case turnover times.Design, settingProspective, cluster randomised study in a 23-operating room (OR) suite.ParticipantsSurgeons, anaesthesia providers, nurses and support staff.ExposureORs were randomised to receive, or not receive, real-time feedback on safety checklist compliance and efficiency metrics via display boards and text messages, followed by a period during which all ORs received feedback.Main outcome(s) and measure(s)Checklist compliance (Pass/Fail) during sign-in, time-out and sign-out demonstrated by (1) use of checklist, (2) team attentiveness, (3) required duration, (4) proper sequence and duration of case turnover times.ResultsSign-in, time-out and sign-out PASS rates increased from 25%, 16% and 32% during baseline phase (n=1886) to 64%, 84% and 68% for feedback ORs versus 40%, 77% and 51% for no-feedback ORs (p<0.004) during the intervention phase (n=2693). Pass rates were 91%, 95% and 84% during the all-feedback phase (n=2001). For scheduled cases (n=1406, 71%), feedback reduced mean turnover times by 14% (41.4 min vs 48.1 min, p<0.004), and the improvement was sustained during the all-feedback period. Feedback had no effect on turnover time for unscheduled cases (n=587, 29%).Conclusions and relevanceOur data indicate that remote video auditing with feedback improves surgical safety checklist compliance for all cases, and turnover time for scheduled cases, but not for unscheduled cases.

Background In England, NHS Blood and Transplant conducts national audits of transfusion and provides feedback to hospitals to promote evidence-based practice. Audits demonstrate 20% of transfusions fall outside guidelines. The AFFINITIE programme (Development & Evaluation of A udit and F eedback IN terventions to I ncrease evidence-based T ransfusion pract I c E) involves two linked, 2×2 factorial, cluster-randomised trials, each evaluating two theoretically-enhanced audit and feedback interventions to reduce unnecessary blood transfusions in UK hospitals. The first intervention concerns the content/format of feedback reports. The second aims to support hospital transfusion staff to plan their response to feedback and includes a web-based toolkit and telephone support. Interpretation of trials is enhanced by comprehensively assessing intervention fidelity. However, reviews demonstrate fidelity evaluations are often limited, typically only assessing whether interventions were delivered as intended. This protocol presents methods for assessing fidelity across five dimensions proposed by the Behaviour Change Consortium fidelity framework, including intervention designer-, provider- and recipient-levels. Methods (1) Design: Intervention content will be specified in intervention manuals in terms of component behaviour change techniques (BCTs). Treatment differentiation will be examined by comparing BCTs across intervention/standard practice, noting the proportion of unique/convergent BCTs. (2) Training: draft feedback reports and audio-recorded role-play telephone support scenarios will be content analysed to assess intervention providers’ competence to deliver manual-specified BCTs. (3) Delivery: intervention materials (feedback reports, toolkit) and audio-recorded telephone support session transcripts will be content analysed to assess actual delivery of manual-specified BCTs during the intervention period. (4) Receipt and (5) enactment: questionnaires, semi-structured interviews based on the Theoretical Domains Framework, and objective web-analytics data (report downloads, toolkit usage patterns) will be analysed to assess hospital transfusion staff exposure to, understanding and enactment of the interventions, and to identify contextual barriers/enablers to implementation. Associations between observed fidelity and trial outcomes (% unnecessary transfusions) will be examined using mediation analyses. Discussion If the interventions have acceptable fidelity, then results of the AFFINITIE trials can be attributed to effectiveness, or lack of effectiveness, of the interventions. Hence, this comprehensive assessment of fidelity will be used to interpret trial findings. These methods may inform fidelity assessments in future trials. Trial registration ISRCTN 15490813 . Registered 11/03/2015

Objective of the study To audit patients’ allergy documentation in a large rural hospital an to make recommendations about accurate drug allergies in hospital settings. Setting a 257 bed large hospital and fully integrated health service in Australia, providing a range of services including; medicine, surgery, aged care, cancer care, mental health, maternity and rehabilitation. Method A retrospective design was used to fulfil the aims of this study. Patient medical records were randomly selected and checked for allergy documentation over a 6 month period. Results A total of 521 patients’ medical records were reviewed. Of all the medical records examined in total, 269 (52%) had no allergy, while 252 (48%) reported some kind of allergy. Overall, only three patients (0.6%) had their allergy details fully and accurately recorded in the three places audited and they are the front cover of the patients’ notes, the admission notes and the drug chart. Conclusion Many preventable medical errors are caused by poor documentation which is often due to lack of drug allergy information. All health professional should be more pro-active in determining the manner of any drug allergy or adverse drug reactions (ADR) along with the extent of the reaction.