Facilitators and barriers to clinical practice guideline use among nurses.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines, which are designed to encourage consistent, efficient applications of scientific evidence in the daily practice of clinicians, are often underutilized. The majority of research concerning their implementation and use has focused on the work of physicians; more research concerning their use by nurses is needed. OBJECTIVES: We sought to learn more about nurses' perceptions of facilitators and barriers to the use of clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: This study examined free-text responses to two open-ended survey questions provided by 575 RNs working at 134 Veterans Affairs medical centers nationwide. We performed conventional content analysis on these data, which allowed thematic categories and subcategories of responses to emerge. RESULTS: A majority of identified facilitators and barriers to nurses' use of clinical practice guidelines were external (outside the individual nurse's control). The most frequently mentioned facilitators and barriers were in the categories of communication, education/orientation/training, and time/staffing/workload. CONCLUSIONS: Social and organizational factors appear to play critical roles in nurses' adoption and use of guidelines. Health care leaders seeking to improve clinical practice guideline use among nurses should ensure that facilitators and barriers-particularly those that are social and organizational-are considered and addressed.

Facility and market factors affecting transitions from nursing home to community.

BACKGROUND: Research into nursing home transitions has given limited attention to the facility or community contexts. OBJECTIVE: To identify facility and market factors affecting transitions of nursing home residents back to the community. RESEARCH DESIGN: Multilevel models were used to estimate effects of facility and market factors on facility-level community discharge rates after controlling for resident demographic, health, and functional conditions. Facility discharge rates were adjusted using Empirical Bayes estimation. SUBJECTS: Annual cohort of first-time admissions (N=24,648) to 378 Minnesota nursing facilities in 75 nursing home markets from July 2005 to June 2006. MEASURES: Community discharge within 90 days of admission; facility occupancy, payer mix, ownership, case-mix acuity, size, admissions from hospitals, nurse staffing level, and proportion of admissions preferring or having support to return to the community; and nursing market population size, average occupancy, market concentration, and availability of home and community-based services. RESULTS: Rates of community discharge (Empirical Bayes residual) were highest in facilities with more residents preferring community discharge, more Medicare days, higher nurse staffing levels, and higher occupancy. In addition, facilities had higher community discharge rates if they were located in markets with a greater ratio of home and community-based services recipients to nursing home residents and with larger populations. CONCLUSIONS: State Medicaid programs should undertake system-level interventions that encourage nursing facilities to reduce unused bed capacity, balance the mix of payers, invest in nurse staffing, and take other steps to promote community discharges. In addition, states should increase home and community-based services, particularly in markets with low community discharge rates.

Minnesota's Nursing Facility Performance-Based Incentive Payment Program: an innovative model for promoting care quality.

PURPOSE: Minnesota's Nursing Facility Performance-Based Incentive Payment Program (PIPP) supports provider-initiated projects aimed at improving care quality and efficiency. PIPP moves beyond conventional pay for performance. It seeks to promote implementation of evidence-based practices, encourage innovation and risk taking, foster collaboration and shared learning, and establish a solid case for investing in better quality from the perspective of the state, providers, and consumers. We explain PIPP rationale and design, describe projects and participating facilities, and present findings from interviews with project leaders. DESIGN AND METHODS: Provider-initiated projects lasting from 1 to 3 years are selected through a competitive process and are funded for up to 5% of the daily operating per diem rate. Providers are at risk of losing up to 20% of their project funding if they fail to achieve targets on state nursing facility performance measures. RESULTS: Minnesota has made a major investment in the PIPP by supporting 45 individual or collaborative projects, representing approximately 160 facilities and annual funding of approximately $18 million. Projects involve a wide range of interventions, such as fall reduction, wound prevention, exercise, improved continence, pain management, resident-centered care and culture change, and transitions to the community. IMPLICATIONS: The PIPP can serve as a model for other states seeking to promote nursing facility quality either in combination or in place of conventional pay-for-performance efforts.