ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: As part of an improvement program targeting ICU, a national collaborative was launched to help hospitals implement patient- and family-centered care engagement initiatives. DESIGN: Ten-month quality improvement collaborative. SETTING: Guided by a national patient and family advisory group, participating teams implemented an individual project including open visitation; integrating families on rounds; establishing a patient and family advisory committee; using patient and family diaries, among others. SUBJECTS: Sixty-three adult and PICU teams from both academic and community hospitals in 34 states participated. INTERVENTIONS: Monthly team calls, quarterly webinars, newsletters, an online eCommunity, and team reporting assignments were used to facilitate project implementation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The Family Satisfaction with Care in the ICU 24 was used to assess family satisfaction. Clinician perceptions were assessed with the Institute for Patient- and Family-Centered Care Self-Assessment Inventory. Thematic analysis was used to explore narrative data captured from team reports of project barriers, facilitators, and the experience of participating in the collaborative. A total of 2,530 family member and 3,999 clinician surveys were completed. Postimplementation, family members reported statistically significant increases in overall family satisfaction, satisfaction with decision-making, and satisfaction with quality of care (Family Satisfaction with Care in the ICU mean score change range 0.83-1.24; p ≤ 0.027). Clinicians reported that opportunities for families to participate as members of the care team increased. Major barriers included lack of buy-in and ability to promote change in the clinical setting, managing the workload of implementation, and funding to support initiatives. CONCLUSIONS: A national collaborative format was useful to assist ICU teams to implement patient- and family-engagement initiatives. Enlisting stakeholder support, engaging unit-based champions, and highlighting benefits of family engagement can help ICU teams to promote family member involvement and engagement.
Subject(s)
Critical Care/methods , Family , Intensive Care Units , Adult , Aged , Critical Care/standards , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Participation , Quality Improvement , United StatesSubject(s)
Documentation/standards , Health Services Research , Lacerations/prevention & control , Patient Safety , Postoperative Complications/prevention & control , Punctures/adverse effects , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Humans , Incidence , Lacerations/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Patient- and family-centered care (PFCC) is premised on the belief that patients, families, and healthcare providers who are empowered and engaged throughout the healthcare system are integral components, with each vital to the delivery of quality and safe care. Adopting a PFCC culture can result in improved quality, safety, communication, and patient satisfaction. University HealthSystem Consortium hospitals that have adopted these concepts have demonstrated significant improvements. By using an initial survey, developing benchmark parameters, and conducting ongoing analysis and feedback, these hospitals have developed ways to reap many benefits.
Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/methods , Benchmarking , Patient-Centered Care/methods , Professional-Family Relations , Professional-Patient Relations , Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Patient-Centered Care/organization & administration , United StatesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The extent of acceptability of red blood cells (RBCs) containing additive solutions (ASs) for low-volume neonatal transfusions among hospitals is unknown. Also unknown is whether hospitals have policies that address the risk of hyperkalemia associated with prolonged storage either with or without irradiation for neonatal transfusions. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A benchmarking survey of University HealthSystem Consortium members included questions regarding the acceptability of RBC units containing ASs for low-volume neonatal transfusions, policies addressing the length of RBC storage in AS, and policies regarding storage periods after irradiation. RESULTS: Twenty-eight of 47 respondents (60%) accept the use of at least one AS (AS-1, AS-3, or AS-5). Twenty-one (45%) accept the use of all three ASs for neonatal transfusions. Thirty-seven of 45 respondents (82%) do not have a policy requiring washing of RBCs used for low-volume transfusions beyond a specified number of days of storage or days after irradiation. CONCLUSIONS: Although the majority of institutions will use ASs, a significant number of institutions will not. The reasons for these policies were not elicited. Most respondents did not have a policy requiring washing beyond a specified number of days of storage or days after irradiation. Since RBCs stored for prolonged periods of time after irradiation have increased plasma potassium, it is important to develop policies to prevent clinically significant posttransfusion hyperkalemia in at-risk patients when RBCs are irradiated and not used immediately. More work still needs to be done to resolve these fundamental precepts of neonatal transfusion.