ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Postoperative delirium (POD) is seen in approximately 15% of elderly patients and is related to poorer outcomes. In 2017, the Federal Joint Committee (Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss) introduced a 'quality contract' (QC) as a new instrument to improve healthcare in Germany. One of the four areas for improvement of in-patient care is the 'Prevention of POD in the care of elderly patients' (QC-POD), as a means to reduce the risk of developing POD and its complications.The Institute for Quality Assurance and Transparency in Health Care identified gaps in the in-patient care of elderly patients related to the prevention, screening and treatment of POD, as required by consensus-based and evidence-based delirium guidelines. This paper introduces the QC-POD protocol, which aims to implement these guidelines into the clinical routine. There is an urgent need for well-structured, standardised and interdisciplinary pathways that enable the reliable screening and treatment of POD. Along with effective preventive measures, these concepts have a considerable potential to improve the care of elderly patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The QC-POD study is a non-randomised, pre-post, monocentric, prospective trial with an interventional concept following a baseline control period. The QC-POD trial was initiated on 1 April 2020 between Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin and the German health insurance company BARMER and will end on 30 June 2023. INCLUSION CRITERIA: patients 70 years of age or older that are scheduled for a surgical procedure requiring anaesthesia and insurance with the QC partner (BARMER). Exclusion criteria included patients with a language barrier, moribund patients and those unwilling or unable to provide informed consent. The QC-POD protocol provides perioperative intervention at least two times per day, with delirium screening and non-pharmacological preventive measures. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol was approved by the ethics committee of the Charité-Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany (EA1/054/20). The results will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and presented at national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04355195.
Subject(s)
Anesthesia , Emergence Delirium , Aged , Humans , Prospective Studies , Academies and Institutes , Insurance, HealthABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: A peripheral venous catheter (PVC) is the most widely used device for obtaining vascular access, allowing the administration of fluids and medication. Up to 25% of adult patients, and 50% of pediatric patients experience a first-attempt cannulation failure. In addition to patient and clinician characteristics, device features might affect the handling and success rates. The objective of the study was to compare the first-attempt cannulation success rate between PVCs with wings and a port access (Vasofix® Safety, B. Braun, abbreviated hereon in as VS) with those without (Introcan® Safety, B. Braun, abbreviated hereon in as IS) in an anesthesiological cohort. METHODS: An open label, multi-center, randomized trial was performed. First-attempt cannulation success rates were examined, along with relevant patient, clinician, and device characteristics with univariate and multivariate analyses. Information on handling and adherence to use instructions was gathered, and available catheters were assessed for damage. RESULTS: Two thousand three hundred four patients were included in the intention to treat analysis. First-attempt success rate was significantly higher with winged and ported catheters (VS) than with the non-winged, non-ported design (IS) (87.5% with VS vs. 78.2% with IS; PChi < .001). Operators rated the handling of VS as superior (rating of "good" or "very good: 86.1% VS vs. 20.8% IS, PChi < .001). Reinsertion of the needle into the catheter after partial withdrawal-prior or during the catheterization attempt-was associated with an increased risk of cannulation failure (7.909, CI 5.989-10.443, P < .001 and 23.023, CI 10.372-51.105, P < .001, respectively) and a twofold risk of catheter damage (OR 1.999, CI 1.347-2.967, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: First-attempt cannulation success of peripheral, ported, winged catheters was higher compared to non-ported, non-winged devices. The handling of the winged and ported design was better rated by the clinicians. Needle reinsertions are related to an increase in rates of catheter damage and cannulation failure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT02213965 , Date: 12/08/2014.
