Factors influencing hospital implementation of acute pain management practice guidelines.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To identify factors that may influence the implementation of acute pain management guidelines in hospital settings. DESIGN: Two questionnaire surveys. SETTING: Healthcare Association of New York State, Albany, NY. MEASUREMENT: The surveys were administered to 220 hospitals in New York State regarding their acute pain management practices and resources available. One survey was addressed to each hospital's chief executive officer (CEO) and the second survey was addressed to the clinical director of the Department of Anesthesiology or Acute Pain Service. The barriers and incentives to guideline implementation identified by CEOs were analyzed using factor analysis. Logistic regression was employed to determine predictors of guideline implementation by linking the CEOs' survey data with the clinical directors' report of guideline usage. MAIN RESULTS: According to clinical directors, only 27% of the responding hospitals were using a published pain management practice guideline. Factors predictive of guideline implementation include resource availability and belief in the benefits of using guidelines to improve quality of care or to achieve economic/legal advantages. Guideline implementation, however, does not necessarily include applying all key elements recommended by the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (formerly Agency for Health Care Policy and Research) guideline. For example, a collaborative, interdisciplinary approach to pain control was used in only 42% of the hospitals, and underutilization of nonpharmacologic therapies to control pain was widespread. Resource availability, particularly staff with expertise in pain management and existence of a formal quality assurance program to monitor pain management, was significantly predictive of compliance with key guideline elements. CONCLUSIONS: Resource availability significantly influences the implementation of pain management practice guidelines in hospital settings. Implementation is often incomplete because various factors affect the feasibility of individual guideline elements and may explain the varying results that guidelines have had on clinical practices.

Adapting the HCUP QIs for hospital use: the experience in New York State.

BACKGROUND: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality developed the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) quality indicators (QIs) in 1994. The Healthcare Association of New York State (HANYS; Albany), which represents more than 500 nonprofit and public hospitals, long-term care facilities, and home health care agencies, has adapted the HCUP QIs since 1997 to produce annual comparative reports for its member hospitals. Specifically designed for internal use, the reports have been well received and have drawn interest from other hospital associations and state health departments. METHODS: The HCUP QIs were applied to the New York State hospital discharge abstract. A risk adjustment model was constructed for each complication measure. Measures of utilization and access to care were adjusted for differences in patient demographics and payer status by indirect standardization. Data are presented in graphic format. Each hospital receives its own report (in both paper copy and CD-ROM) with comparisons to statewide norms, regional averages, and peer group averages. Report prepared for hospital systems include data for each affiliated hospital. CONCLUSIONS: When used appropriately, the HCUP QIs provide valuable information for individual hospitals to assess quality of care and target potential areas for improvement. The HCUP QIs also give hospitals a broad perspective to look beyond their own institutions and develop community-based quality improvement initiatives. Nevertheless, given the limitations that commonly exist with administrative databases and the lack of standard risk adjustment systems, the HCUP QIs are best used for internal purposes and not for public reporting.