Implementation of a multimodal patient safety improvement program "SafetyLEAP" in intensive care units.

Purpose Patient safety remains a top priority in healthcare. Many organizations have developed systems to monitor and prevent harm, and have invested in different approaches to quality improvement. Despite these organizational efforts to better detect adverse events, efficient resolution of safety problems remains a significant challenge. The authors developed and implemented a comprehensive multimodal patient safety improvement program called SafetyLEAP. The term "LEAP" is an acronym that highlights the three facets of the program including: a Leadership and Engagement approach; Audit and feedback; and a Planned improvement intervention. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the implementation of the SafetyLEAP program in the intensive care units (ICUs) of three large hospitals. Design/methodology/approach A comparative case study approach was used to compare and contrast the adherence to each component of the SafetyLEAP program. The study was conducted using a convenience sample of three ( n=3) ICUs from two provinces. Two reviewers independently evaluated major adherence metrics of the SafetyLEAP program for their completeness. Analysis was performed for each individual case, and across cases. Findings A total of 257 patients were included in the study. Overall, the proportion of the SafetyLEAP tasks completed was 64.47, 100, and 26.32 percent, respectively. ICU nos 1 and 2 were able to identify opportunities for improvement, follow a quality improvement process and demonstrate positive changes in patient safety. The main factors influencing adherence were the engagement of a local champion, competing priorities, and the identification of appropriate resources. Practical implications The SafetyLEAP program allowed for the identification of processes that could result in patient harm in the ICUs. However, the success in improving patient safety was dependent on the engagement of the care teams. Originality/value The authors developed an evidence-based approach to systematically and prospectively detect, improve, and evaluate actions related to patient safety.

An environmental scan of quality indicators in critical care.

BACKGROUND: We performed a directed environmental scan to identify and categorize quality indicators unique to critical care that are reported by key stakeholder organizations. METHODS: We convened a panel of experts (n = 9) to identify key organizations that are focused on quality improvement or critical care, and reviewed their online publications and website content for quality indicators. We identified quality indicators specific to the care of critically ill adult patients and then categorized them according to the Donabedian and the Institute of Medicine frameworks. We also noted the organizations' rationale for selecting these indicators and their reported evidence base. RESULTS: From 28 targeted organizations, we identified 222 quality indicators, 127 of which were unique. Of the 127 indicators, 63 (32.5%) were safety indicators and 61 (31.4%) were effectiveness indicators. The rationale for selecting quality indicators was supported by consensus for 58 (26.1%) of the 222 indicators and by published research evidence for 45 (20.3%); for 119 indicators (53.6%), the rationale was not reported or the reader was referred to other organizations' reports. Of the 127 unique quality indicators, 27 (21.2%) were accompanied by a formal grading of evidence, whereas for 52 (40.9%), no reference to evidence was provided. INTERPRETATION: There are many quality indicators related to critical care that are available in the public domain. However, owing to a paucity of rationale for selection, supporting evidence and results of implementation, it is not clear which indicators should be adopted for use.

A Survey of Rounding Practices in Canadian Adult Intensive Care Units.

OBJECTIVE: To describe rounding practices in Canadian adult Intensive Care Units (ICU) and identify opportunities for improvement. DESIGN: Mixed methods design. Cross sectional survey of Canadian Adult ICUs (n = 180) with purposefully sampled follow-up interviews (n = 7). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Medical directors representing 111 ICUs (62%) participated in the survey. Rounding practices varied across ICUs with the majority reporting the use of interprofessional rounds (81%) that employed an open (94%) and collaborative (86%) approach, occurred at the patient's bedside (82%), and started at a standard time (79%) and standard location (56%). Most participants reported that patients (83%) and family members (67%) were welcome to attend rounds. Approximately half of ICUs (48%) used tools to facilitate rounds. Interruptions during rounds were reported to be common (i.e., ≥ 1 interruption for ≥ 50% of patients) in 46% of ICUs. Four themes were identified from qualitative analysis of participant responses to open-ended survey questions and interviews: multidisciplinarity, patient and family involvement, factors influencing productivity, and teaching and learning. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable variation in current rounding practices in Canadian medical/surgical ICUs. Opportunities exist to improve ICU rounds including ensuring the engagement of essential participants, clearly defining participant roles, establishing a standardized approach to the rounding process, minimizing interruptions, modifying the role of teaching, utilizing a structured rounding tool, and developing a metric for measuring rounding quality.