Developing and implementing measures of quality of care in the intensive care unit.

As consumers, payers, and regulatory agencies require evidence regarding quality of care, the demand for intensive care unit (ICU) quality measures will likely grow. ICU providers and professional societies may need to partner with experts in quality measurement to develop and implement quality measures. This essay outlines the steps for developing and implementing quality measures and provides examples of potential ICU quality indicators. Outcome measures, in particular mortality rates, require risk adjustment, making data collection burdensome and broad implementation unlikely. On the other hand, structure and process measures may be feasible to implement broadly. Given the steps for developing quality measures outlined in this essay and the growing evidence in the literature regarding the impact of ICU care, the future should realize the development and implementation of ICU quality indicators that are rigorously developed and provide insights into opportunities to improve the quality of ICU care.

Assessing the effectiveness of critical pathways on reducing resource utilization in the surgical intensive care unit.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of procedure-specific surgical critical pathways on reducing resource utilization in a university surgical intensive care unit (ICU). DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective cohort study in a university surgical ICU. PATIENTS: 194 patients, accounting for 255 patient days, sampled on randomly selected days over a 12-month period of time. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: The primary outcomes of this study were pathway eligibility and laboratory utilization. Patients were eligible for a procedure-specific pathway in 34% of patient days identified, and the patient's clinical course was "on" pathway in 22% of patient days. Of those "on" the pathway, 54% had a pathway present in the chart and 32% of these included documentation of the patient's clinical course. Thus in 78% of the patient days the patient was either not eligible for a critical pathway or the patient's clinical course was "off" pathway. In those patients "on" the pathway 46 % did not have a pathway present in the chart. Being on a critical pathway did not reduce laboratory utilization. Laboratory utilization did not vary between patients "on" and "off" the pathway (19.1 +/- 11.3 laboratory tests/patient day versus 20.4 +/- 5.7 laboratory tests/patient day). Predicted laboratory utilization by the pathway was 5.6 laboratory tests/patient day. By reducing actual laboratory utilization to that predicted by the critical pathway we would reduce laboratory utilization at our institution by $1.2 million per year. CONCLUSIONS: Procedure-specific surgical critical pathways are not an effective tool for reducing resource utilization in our ICU. Most of our patients were not eligible for an available pathway, and those who were eligible and were "on" the pathway did not appear to have laboratory utilization guided by the pathway. Future initiatives need to explore other means such as ICU-specific care processes to reduce resource utilization in the ICU.

Evidence-based medicine in anesthesiology.

By making the clinical decision making process explicit, conscious, and science based, we may avoid confusing opinion with evidence. EBM may help sharpen our critical appraisal skills and thus improve the way we practice, teach, and conduct research. Nevertheless, EBM will need to supplement rather than substitute for other approaches to patient care and teaching. EBM may better incorporate patients' values into clinical decision making, and this may be especially important in anesthesiology, where we are in need of valid evidence about important clinical issues such as preoperative testing and postoperative analgesia. By incorporating valid scientific evidence and patients' values into clinical decision making, we may improve patient outcomes. Outside of internal medicine, the literature suggesting that the practice of EBM improves outcomes is sparse, though increasing. Future studies to critically evaluate the practice of EBM in anesthesiology and critical care would be helpful.