Effect of Standardized Bundle Care and Bundle Compliance on Reducing Surgical Site Infections: A Pragmatic Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND Care bundles for infection control consist of a set of evidence-based measures to prevent infections. This retrospective study aimed to compare surgical site infections (SSIs) from a single hospital surveillance system between 2017 and 2020, before and after implementing a standardized care bundle across specialties in 2019. It also aimed to assess whether bundle compliance affects the rate of SSIs. MATERIAL AND METHODS A care bundle consisting of 4 components (peri-operative antibiotics use, peri-operative glycemic control, pre-operative skin preparation, and maintaining intra-operative body temperature) was launched in 2019. We compared the incidence rates of SSIs, standardized infection ratio (SIR), and clinical outcomes of surgical procedures enrolled in the surveillance system before and after introducing the bundle care. The level of bundle compliance, defined as the number of fully implemented bundle components, was evaluated. RESULTS We included 6059 procedures, with 2010 in the pre-bundle group and 4049 in the post-bundle group. Incidence rates of SSIs (1.7% vs 1.0%, P=0.013) and SIR (0.8 vs 1.48, P<0.01) were significantly lower in the post-bundle group. The incidence of SSIs was significantly lower when all bundle components were fully adhered to, compared with when only half of the components were adhered to (0.3% vs 4.0%, P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS SSIs decreased significantly after the application of a standardized care bundle for surgical procedures across specialties. Full adherence to all bundle components was the key to effectively reducing the risk of surgical site infections.

Impact of care bundles on the occurrence and outcomes of acute kidney injury among patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Several reports suggested that compliance with acute kidney injury care bundles among hospitalized patients resulted in improved kidney and patient outcomes. We investigated the effect of acute kidney injury care bundle utilization on the incidence of acute kidney injury and renal outcomes in a large cohort of myocardial infarction patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: We included patients with myocardial infarction admitted following percutaneous coronary intervention between January 2008 and December 2020. From January 2016, acute kidney injury care bundle was implemented in our cardiac intensive care unit. Acute kidney injury care bundle consisted of simple standardized investigations and interventions, including strict monitoring of serum creatinine and urine analysis, planning investigations, treatment, and guidance about seeking nephrologist advice. Patients' records were evaluated for the occurrence of acute kidney injury, its severity, and recovery, before and after the implementation of acute kidney injury care bundle. RESULTS: We included 2646 patients (1941 patients in the years 2008-2015 and 705 patients in the years 2016-2020). Implementation of care bundles resulted in a significant decrease in the occurrence of acute kidney injury from 190/1945 to 42/705 (10-6%; p < 0.001), with a trend for lower acute kidney injury score > 1 (20% vs. 25%; p = 0.07) and higher acute kidney injury recovery (62% vs. 45%, p = 0.001). Using a multivariable regression model, the use of care bundles resulted in a 45% decrease in the relative risk for acute kidney injury (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.37-0.82, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Among patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, treated with percutaneous coronary intervention and admitted to our cardiac intensive care unit over the period January 2008-December 2020, compliance with acute kidney injury care bundle was independently associated with a significant decrease in occurrence of acute kidney injury and with better renal outcomes following acute kidney injury. Further interventions, such as e-alert systems for acute kidney injury, could improve utilization of the acute kidney injury care bundle and optimize its clinical benefits.

A quality improvement project: Reducing bloodstream infection by improving adherence to the care bundle of peripheral vascular catheters at the COVID-19 treatment centre.

INTRODUCTION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, bloodstream infection (BSI) rates were substantially rising in Sungai Buloh Hospital (HSB). It is believed that the COVID-19 pandemic has had an adverse impact on BSI incidence caused by contaminated periphery vascular catheters (PVCs). The study's objective is to reduce the BSI rates in HSB by improving adherence to the PVC care bundle via the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A quality improvement (QI) project was employed over four months, from June to September 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic in HSB. All adults hospitalised for COVID-19 with intravenous lines were subjected to data collection. A baseline audit was conducted to study BSI incidence from April to May 2021. Implementation was carried out by PDSA cycles and data on BSI rates per 100 admissions was described using a monthly run chart. RESULTS: At baseline, the BSI rate per 100 admissions was 5.44 before implementing our QI project. Initial changes via PDSA cycles did not bring significant improvements to BSI rates and a rising trend in BSI rates was observed after two PDSA cycles. Further audits identified the problem of noncompliance with the practice of aseptic non-touch technique (ANTT) and a lack of effective leadership in implementing the PVC care bundle. The third PDSA cycle focused on adopting practical leadership skills among senior clinicians to ensure compliance with the prevention bundle and to encourage the use of ultrasound guidance for difficult line insertion. After the third PDSA cycle, the BSI rate per 100 admissions was reduced from 6.41 to 4.34 (p < 0.05). The BSI rates continued to decline down the line for another five months. CONCLUSION: Through QI initiatives, the risk of BSI can be significantly reduced.

The Impact of Care Bundles on the Incidence of Surgical Site Infections: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review assesses the effects of care bundles on the incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs). DATA SOURCES: The search was conducted between February and May 2021, using PubMed, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if they used systematic review methodology, were in English, used a quantitative design, and explored the use of care bundles for SSI prevention. A total of 35 studies met the inclusion criteria, and 26 provided data conducive to meta-analysis. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted using a predesigned extraction tool, and analysis was undertaken using RevMan (Cochrane, London, UK). Quality appraisal was undertaken using evidence-based librarianship. DATA SYNTHESIS: The mean sample size was 7,982 (median, 840) participants. There was a statistically significant difference in SSI incidence in favor of using a care bundle (SSI incidence 4%, 703/17,549 in the care bundle group vs 7%, 1,157/17,162 in the usual care group). The odds ratio was 0.55 (95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.73; P < .00001), suggesting that there is a 45% reduction in the odds of SSI development for the care bundle group. The mean validity score for all studies was 84% (SD, 0.04%). CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that implementing care bundles reduced SSI incidence. However, because there was clinically important variation in the composition of and compliance with care bundles, additional research with standardized care bundles is needed to confirm this finding.

The effect of a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle on nursing workload costs.

AIM: This study investigated the effect of care under the guidance of a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle on pressure ulcer incidence rates and on nursing workload costs. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This prospective pre-post interventional study was conducted in an anesthesia and reanimation intensive care unit. The sample consisted of 16 nurses and 84 patients. METHODS: The study was conducted in two periods: (1) nursing workload of pre-care bundle period and (2) nursing workload of post-care bundle period. In the collection of data, 6 forms (the demographic data forms, the Braden scale, nurse information form, the care bundle follow-up form and nursing workload follow-up form) were administered. The main outcomes of the study; Pressure ulcer incidence rate was evaluated with Form V, and nursing workload costs were evaluated with Form VI. These forms were evaluated daily by the nurses. In the first period (15.09.2018-30.11.2018), pressure ulcer incidence rates and nursing workload costs were evaluated before training. Then, the researcher trained nurses on how to prevent pressure ulcers and use the care bundle. The care bundles components were risk assessment, skincare, activity, in-service training, nutrition, wetness/incontinence and support surface management, and keeping records. In the second period (01.12.2018-15.02.2019), pressure ulcer incidence rates and nursing workload costs were evaluated after the training. The outcomes of the two periods regarding the incidence of pressure ulcers and nursing workload costs were compared. RESULTS: The pressure ulcer incidence rates before and after the care bundle were 22.1 and 13.0 per 100 patient-day, respectively. There was a decrease in pressure ulcer incidence rates after the care bundle, but it wasn't significant (p = 0.138). The total workload cost of pressure ulcer prevention was significantly lower after the care bundle than before (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: The pressure ulcer incidence rates were lower after the care bundle than before, albeit insignificantly. The total pressure ulcer prevention workload costs were significantly lower after the care bundle than before. The reduction in pressure ulcer incidence and workload cost indicates that the use of care bundle is effective. Healthcare professionals in intensive care units should use a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle more often.

Clinical decision support for severe trauma patients: Machine learning based definition of a bundle of care for hemorrhagic shock and traumatic brain injury.

BACKGROUND: Deviation from guidelines is frequent in emergency situations, and this may lead to increased mortality. Probably because of time constraints, 55% is the greatest reported guidelines compliance rate in severe trauma patients. This study aimed to identify among all available recommendations a reasonable bundle of items that should be followed to optimize the outcome of hemorrhagic shocks (HSs) and severe traumatic brain injuries (TBIs). METHODS: We first estimated the compliance with French and European guidelines using the data from the French TraumaBase registry. Then, we used a machine learning procedure to reduce the number of recommendations into a minimal set of items to be followed to minimize 7-day mortality. We evaluated the bundles using an external validation cohort. RESULTS: This study included 5,924 trauma patients (1,414 HS and 4,955 TBI) between 2011 and August 2019 and studied compliance to 36 recommendation items. Overall compliance rate to recommendation items was 71.6% and 66.9% for HS and TBI, respectively. In HS, compliance was significantly associated with 7-day decreased mortality in univariate analysis but not in multivariate analysis (risk ratio [RR], 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90-1.17; p = 0.06). In TBI, compliance was significantly associated with decreased mortality in univariate and multivariate analysis (RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.92; p = 0.01). For HS, the bundle included 13 recommendation items. In the validation cohort, when this bundle was applied, patients were found to have a lower 7-day mortality rate (RR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.27-0.63; p = 0.01). In TBI, the bundle included seven items. In the validation cohort, when this bundle was applied, patients had a lower 7-day mortality rate (RR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.34-0.71; p = 0.02). DISCUSSION: Using a machine-learning procedure, we were able to identify a subset of recommendations that minimizes 7-day mortality following traumatic HS and TBI. These two bundles remain to be evaluated in a prospective manner. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Care Management, level II.

Decreased incidence of cesarean surgical site infection rate with hospital-wide perioperative bundle.

BACKGROUND: Reduction in the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) serves as a measure of patient safety and quality improvement. Cesarean birth (CB) accounts for 31.9% of all childbirths in the United States. However, our understanding of SSI prevention bundles predominantly stems from gynecological and colorectal surgeries. This study aimed to determine the efficacy of a standardized perioperative bundle designed to reduce SSI in CBs. METHODS: All CB patients at Flushing Hospital Medical Center from 2017 to 2019 were included in a retrospective analysis. Patients were divided into three groups based on the timing of intervention: prebundle/control, transition, and postbundle. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics were summarized using descriptive statistics. Multiple logistic regression was performed to determine the association between bundle group and SSI, considering variables different between groups at baseline (P < 0.10). RESULTS: Two thousand eight hundred and seventy-five CBs were performed: 1086 in prebundle, 812 in transition, and 977 in postbundle phase. In the prebundle phase, 25 CBs (2.3%) were complicated by SSIs; in the transition phase, 10 (1.2%) had SSIs; and in the postbundle phase, 7 (0.7%; P = 0.009) had SSIs. In a logistic regression model, only use of the CB bundle (OR 0.26 [95% CI 0.07-0.94]; P = 0.04), rupture of membranes (0.29 [0.09-0.87]; P = 0.03), and operating room time (1.02 [1.01-1.04]; P = 0.01) were significant in prediction of SSI. SSI postbundle was significantly reduced from prebundle (0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Thus, introduction of a hospital-wide perioperative bundle significantly reduced SSI rates, and should be developed as a mainstay of CB surgical care.

Efficacy and safety of an abbreviated perioperative care bundle versus standard perioperative care in children undergoing elective bowel anastomoses: A randomized, noninferiority trial.

PURPOSE: The aim was to evaluate if an abbreviated perioperative care bundle (APCB) is noninferior to the standard care, in terms of efficacy and safety, in pediatric patients undergoing bowel anastomoses. METHODS: A randomized, open, noninferiority trial with two parallel groups of equal size was carried out at the National Institute of Pediatrics in Mexico City, Mexico, from April 2016 to July 2018. The total number analyzed was 74 (37 per group). The APCB comprised same day admission, avoidance of mechanical bowel preparation, optimized antibiotic prophylaxis, and early feeding. Statistical analysis was done with Fisher's exact test or Chi2, and Student's T test. RESULTS: No significant differences were found for demographic variables and type of disease, either for the safety (anastomotic leakage, p 0.753; organ/space surgical site infection, p 0.500) or for some efficacy outcomes (ileus or bowel obstruction, p 0.693). Other efficacy outcomes were better in the study group, with shorter median times for feeding tolerance (19 h vs. 92 h, p < 0.001), for first bowel movement (15 h vs. 36 h, p < 0.001), and for discharge (1 vs. 6 days, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The abbreviated care bundle was proven to be as safe but more efficacious than the standard care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I - randomized controlled trial with adequate statistical power.

Protocol for a multi-centered, stepped wedge, cluster randomized controlled trial of the de-adoption of oral chlorhexidine prophylaxis and implementation of an oral care bundle for mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: the CHORAL study.

BACKGROUND: Routine application of chlorhexidine oral rinse is recommended to reduce risk of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in mechanically ventilated patients. Recent reappraisal of the evidence from two meta-analyses suggests chlorhexidine may cause excess mortality in non-cardiac surgery patients and does not reduce VAP. Mechanisms for possible excess mortality are unclear. The CHORAL study will evaluate the impact of de-adopting chlorhexidine and implementing an oral care bundle (excluding chlorhexidine) on mortality, infection-related ventilator-associated complications (IVACs), and oral health status. METHODS: The CHORAL study is a stepped wedge, cluster randomized controlled trial in six academic intensive care units (ICUs) in Toronto, Canada. Clusters (ICU) will be randomly allocated to six sequential steps over a 14-month period to de-adopt oral chlorhexidine and implement a standardized oral care bundle (oral assessment, tooth brushing, moisturization, and secretion removal). On study commencement, all clusters begin with a control period in which the standard of care is oral chlorhexidine. Clusters then begin crossover from control to intervention every 2 months according to the randomization schedule. Participants include all mechanically ventilated adults eligible to receive the standardized oral care bundle. The primary outcome is ICU mortality; secondary outcomes are IVACs and oral health status. We will determine demographics, antibiotic usage, mortality, and IVAC rates from a validated local ICU clinical registry. With six clusters and 50 ventilated patients on average each month per cluster, we estimate that 4200 patients provide 80% power after accounting for intracluster correlation to detect an absolute reduction in mortality of 5.5%. We will analyze our primary outcome of mortality using a generalized linear mixed model adjusting for time to account for secular trends. We will conduct a process evaluation to determine intervention fidelity and to inform interpretation of the trial results. DISCUSSION: The CHORAL study will inform understanding of the effectiveness of de-adoption of oral chlorhexidine and implementation of a standardized oral care bundle for decreasing ICU mortality and IVAC rates while improving oral health status. Our process evaluation will inform clinicians and decision makers about intervention delivery to support future de-adoption if justified by trial results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03382730 . Registered on December 26, 2017.

2018 John Charnley Award: Analysis of US Hip Replacement Bundled Payments: Physician-initiated Episodes Outperform Hospital-initiated Episodes.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) launched the Bundled Payment for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative in 2013 to create incentives to improve outcomes and reduce costs in various clinical settings, including total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study seeks to quantify BPCI initiative outcomes for THA and to determine the optimal party (for example, hospital versus physician group practice [PGP]) to manage the program. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Is BPCI associated with lower 90-day payments, readmissions, or mortality for elective THA? (2) Is there a difference in 90-day payments, readmissions, or mortality between episodes initiated by PGPs and episodes initiated by hospitals for elective THA? (3) Is BPCI associated with reduced total Elixhauser comorbidity index or age for elective THA? METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis on the CMS Limited Data Set on all Medicare primary elective THAs without a major comorbidity performed in the United States (except Maryland) between January 2013 and March 2016, totaling more than USD 7.1 billion in expenditures. Episodes were grouped into hospital-run BPCI (n = 42,922), PGP-run BPCI (n = 44,662), and THA performed outside of BPCI (n = 284,002). All Medicare Part A payments were calculated over a 90-day period after surgery and adjusted for inflation and regional variation. For each episode, age, sex, race, geographic location, background trend, and Elixhauser comorbidities were determined to control for major confounding variables. Total payments, readmissions, and mortality were compared among the groups with logistic regression. RESULTS: When controlling for demographics, background trend, geographic variation, and total Elixhauser comorbidities in elective Diagnosis-Related Group 470 THA episodes, BPCI was associated with a 4.44% (95% confidence interval [CI], -4.58% to -4.30%; p < 0.001) payment decrease for all participants (USD 1244 decrease from a baseline of USD 18,802); additionally, odds ratios (ORs) for 90-day mortality and readmissions were unchanged. PGP groups showed a 4.81% decrease in payments (95% CI, -5.01% to -4.61%; p < 0.001) after enrolling in BPCI (USD 1335 decrease from a baseline of USD 17,841). Hospital groups showed a 4.04% decrease in payments (95% CI, -4.24% to 3.84%; p < 0.01) after enrolling in BPCI (USD 1138 decrease from a baseline of USD 19,799). The decrease in payments of PGP-run episodes was greater compared with hospital-run episodes. ORs for 90-day mortality and readmission remained unchanged after BPCI for PGP- and hospital-run BPCI programs. Patient age and mean Elixhauser comorbidity index did not change after BPCI for PGP-run, hospital-run, or overall BPCI episodes. CONCLUSIONS: Even when controlling for decreasing costs in traditional fee-for-service care, BPCI is associated with payment reduction with no change in adverse events, and this is not because of the selection of younger patients or those with fewer comorbidities. Furthermore, physician group practices were associated with greater payment reduction than hospital programs with no difference in readmission or mortality from baseline for either. Physicians may be a more logical group than hospitals to manage payment reduction in future healthcare reform. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, economic and decision analysis.

Targeting zero catheter-related bloodstream infections in pediatric intensive care unit: a retrospective matched case-control study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of a new three-component 'bundle' for insertion and management of centrally inserted central catheters (CICCs), designed to minimize catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs) in critically ill children. METHODS: Our 'bundle' has three components: insertion, management, and education. Insertion and management recommendations include: skin antisepsis with 2% chlorhexidine; maximal barrier precautions; ultrasound-guided venipuncture; tunneling of the catheter when a long indwelling time is expected; glue on the exit site; sutureless securement; use of transparent dressing; chlorhexidine sponge dressing on the 7th day; neutral displacement needle-free connectors. All CICCs were inserted by appropriately trained physicians proficient in a standardized simulation training program. RESULTS: We compared CRBSI rate per 1000 catheters-days of CICCs inserted before adoption of our new bundle with that of CICCs inserted after implementation of the bundle. CICCs inserted after adoption of the bundle remained in place for a mean of 2.2 days longer than those inserted before. We found a drop in CRBSI rate to 10%, from 15 per 1000 catheters-days to 1.5. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that a bundle aimed at minimizing CR-BSI in critically ill children should incorporate four practices: (1) ultrasound guidance, which minimizes contamination by reducing the number of attempts and possible break-down of aseptic technique; (2) tunneling the catheter to obtain exit site in the infra-clavicular area with reduced bacterial colonization; (3) glue, which seals and protects the exit site; (4) simulation-based education of the staff.

Perceptions of Workload Burden and Adherence to ABCDE Bundle Among Intensive Care Providers.

BACKGROUND: Use of the interprofessional Awakening and Breathing Coordination, Delirium Monitoring and Management, and Early Mobility (ABCDE) bundle is recommended practice in intensive care, but its adoption remains limited. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between intensive care unit provider attitudes regarding the ABCDE bundle and ABCDE bundle adherence. METHODS: A 1-time survey of 268 care providers in 10 intensive care units across the country who had worked at least 4 shifts per month to examine their attitudes toward workload burden, difficulty carrying out the bundle, perceived safety, confidence, and perceived strength of evidence. Logistic regression models were used to examine the relationship of unit-level provider attitudes with ABCDE bundle adherence in 101 patients, adjusted for patients' age, severity of illness, and comorbidity. RESULTS: For every unit increase in workload burden, adherence to the ABCDE bundle decreased 53% (odds ratio [OR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.28-0.79; P = .004). Bundle difficulty (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.08-1.07), perceived safety (OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.10-2.65), confidence (OR, 0.37, 95% CI, 0.10-1.35), and perceived strength of evidence (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.14-3.35) were not associated with ABCDE bundle adherence. For every unit increase in perceived difficulty carrying out the bundle, adherence with early mobility was reduced 59% (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.19-0.90; P = .03). In addition, ABCDE bundle adherence (ie, ventilator bundle) was less than DE bundle adherence (ie, ventilator-free bundle) (97% vs 72%, z = 5.47; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Focusing interventions on workload burden and factors influencing bundle difficulty may facilitate ABCDE bundle adherence.