Seeking American Society of Clinical Oncology-Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (ASCO-QOPI) certification in a northern New England rural health system and cancer care network.

In 2006 following several years of preliminary study, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) launched the Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI). This cancer-focused quality initiative evolved considerably over the next decade-and-a-half and is expanding globally. QOPI is undoubtedly the leading standard-bearer for quality cancer care and contemporary medical oncology practice. The program garners attention and respect among federal programs, private insurers, and medical oncology practices across the nation. The MaineHealth Cancer Care Network (MHCCN) has undergone expansive growth since 2017. The network provides cancer care to more than 70% of the cases in Maine in a largely rural health system in Northern New England. In fall 2020, the MHCCN QOPI project leadership, following collaborative discussions with the ASCO-QOPI team, elected to proceed with a health system-cancer network-wide QOPI certification. Key themes emerged over the course of our two-year journey including: (1) Developing a highly interprofessional team committed to the project; (2) Capitalizing on a single electronic medical record for data transmission to CancerLinQ; (3) Prior experience, especially policy development, in other cancer-focused accreditation programs across the network; and (4) Building consensus through quarterly stakeholder meetings and awarding Continuing Medical Education (CME) and American Board of Medical Specialists (ABMS) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) credits to oncologists. All participants demonstrated a genuine spirit to work together to achieve certification. We report our successful journey seeking ASCO-QOPI certification across our network, which to our knowledge is the first-of-its-kind endeavor.

Transition from dexmedetomidine to enteral clonidine for ICU sedation: an observational pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Enteral clonidine represents a potentially less costly alternative to dexmedetomidine for sedation in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. This study describes our practice of transitioning selected adult ICU patients from dexmedetomidine to clonidine with a focus on efficacy, safety, and drug acquisition costs. METHODS: We conducted a single-center prospective observational pilot study from January through March 2014. Consecutive patients 18 years and older treated with dexmedetomidine and transitioned to clonidine were followed. The transition was assessed in five phases: dexmedetomidine maintenance, transition, clonidine maintenance, clonidine taper, and post clonidine. Efficacy data included any occurrence of significant pain, excessive agitation or oversedation, delirium, and need for ancillary psychoactive medications. Safety data included any occurrence of bradycardia, hypotension, new second- or third-degree atrioventricular node blockade, and clonidine withdrawal syndrome. Drug acquisition cost avoidances were estimated using average wholesale price. RESULTS: Twenty patients were evaluated. Fifteen (75%) were successfully transitioned from dexmedetomidine within 48 hours of starting clonidine. The initial and maintenance clonidine regimens were 0.3 mg every 6 hours. Clonidine was the sole α2A -receptor agonist administered for 45 hours while in the ICU and for 54 hours outside the ICU. Fentanyl requirements were lower when clonidine was administered as the sole α2A -receptor agonist as compared to dexmedetomidine alone (387 vs. 891 µg/day, p = 0.03). Otherwise, there were no statistically significant differences in efficacy data during the dexmedetomidine and clonidine maintenance phases. No statistically significant differences in safety data were observed. Clonidine withdrawal syndrome criteria were met in one patient. The potential drug acquisition cost avoidance was $819-$2338 per patient during the 3-month study. CONCLUSIONS: Transitioning from dexmedetomidine to clonidine may be an efficacious, safe, and less costly method of maintaining α2A -receptor agonist therapy in critically ill adults; these results warrant confirmation in expanded studies.

Assessment of satisfaction with care among family members of survivors in a neuroscience intensive care unit.

Many prior nursing studies regarding family members specifically of neuroscience intensive care unit (neuro-ICU) patients have focused on identifying their primary needs. A concept related to identifying these needs and assessing whether they have been met is determining whether families explicitly report satisfaction with the care that both they and their loved ones have received. The objective of this study was to explore family satisfaction with care in an academic neuro-ICU and compare results with concurrent data from the same hospital's medical ICU (MICU). Over 38 days, we administered the Family Satisfaction-ICU instrument to neuro-ICU and MICU patients' families at the time of ICU discharge. Those whose loved ones passed away during ICU admission were excluded. When asked about the respect and compassion that they received from staff, 76.3% (95% CI [66.5, 86.1]) of neuro-ICU families were completely satisfied, as opposed to 92.7% in the MICU (95% CI [84.4, 101.0], p = .04). Respondents were less likely to be completely satisfied with the courtesy of staff if they reported participation in zero formal family meeting. Less than 60% of neuro-ICU families were completely satisfied by (1) frequency of physician communication, (2) inclusion and (3) support during decision making, and (4) control over the care of their loved ones. Parents of patients were more likely than other relatives to feel very included and supported in the decision-making process. Future studies may focus on evaluating strategies for neuro-ICU nurses and physicians to provide better decision-making support and to implement more frequent family meetings even for those patients who may not seem medically or socially complicated to the team. Determining satisfaction with care for those families whose loved ones passed away during their neuro-ICU admission is another potential avenue for future investigation.

Consistency of communication among intensive care unit staff as perceived by family members of patients surviving to discharge.

PURPOSE: We hypothesize that intensive care unit (ICU) families frequently perceive that they have received inconsistent information from staff about their relatives and that these inconsistencies influence abilities to make medical decisions, as well as satisfaction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study in the neurosciences and medical ICU at a university hospital. One hundred twenty-four family members of adult patients surviving to ICU discharge completed a questionnaire regarding perceptions of inconsistent information. RESULTS: Of 193 eligible patients, 64.2% had family complete the survey. Thirty-one respondents (25.0%; 95% confidence interval, 7.7) reported at least 1 instance of inconsistent information during their family member's admission, with no difference between the neurosciences ICU (21.5%; 9.3) and the medical ICU (31.1%; 14.1; P = .28). Of those who did receive inconsistent information, 38.7% (95% confidence interval, 18.2) reported multiple episodes and 74.2% (16.3) indicated that episodes occurred within the first 48 hours of admission. These episodes had an adverse effect, with 19.4% (14.7) indicating that they affected satisfaction and 9.7% (11.0) indicating that they made decision making difficult. CONCLUSIONS: Episodes involving inconsistent information from staff as perceived by families may be quite prevalent and may influence decision-making abilities and satisfaction.

Anxiety and depression symptoms among families of adult intensive care unit survivors immediately following brief length of stay.

PURPOSE: Prior studies of anxiety and depression among families of intensive care unit patients excluded those admitted for less than 2 days. We hypothesized that families of surviving patients with length of stay less than 2 days would have similar prevalence of anxiety and depression compared with those admitted for longer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred six family members in the neurosciences and medical intensive care units at a university hospital completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at discharge. RESULTS: The 106 participants represented a response rate of 63.9% among those who received surveys. Fifty-eight surveys (54.7%) were from relatives of patients who were discharged within 2 days of admission, whereas 48 (45.3%) were from those admitted for longer. No difference in anxiety was detected; prevalence was 20.7% (95% confidence interval, 10.4) among shorter stay families and 8.3% (7.8) among longer stay families (P = .10). No difference was also seen with depression; prevalence was 8.6% (7.2) among shorter stay families and 4.2% (5.7) among longer stay families (P = .45). CONCLUSIONS: Families of surviving patients with brief length of stay may have similar prevalence of anxiety and depression at discharge to those with longer length of stay.