Motivational drivers for health professionals in a large quality improvement collaborative project in Brazil: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The success of collaborative quality improvement (QI) projects in healthcare depends on the context and engagement of health teams; however, the factors that modulate teams' motivation to participate in these projects are still unclear. The objective of the current study was to explore the barriers to and facilitators of motivation; the perspective was health professionals in a large project aiming to implement evidence-based infection prevention practices in intensive care units of Brazilian hospitals. METHODS: This qualitative study was based on content analysis of semistructured in-depth interviews held with health professionals who participated in a collaborative QI project named "Improving patient safety on a large scale in Brazil". In accordance with the principle of saturation, we selected a final sample of 12 hospitals located throughout the five regions of Brazil that have implemented QI; then, we conducted videoconference interviews with 28 health professionals from those hospitals. We encoded the interview data with NVivo software, and the interrelations among the data were assessed with the COM-B model. RESULTS: The key barriers identified were belief that improvement increases workload, lack of knowledge about quality improvement, resistance to change, minimal involvement of physicians, lack of supplies, lack support from senior managers and work overload. The primary driver of motivation was tangible outcomes, as evidenced by a decrease in infections. Additionally, factors such as the active participation of senior managers, teamwork, learning in practice and understanding the reason for changes played significant roles in fostering motivation. CONCLUSION: The motivation of health professionals to participate in collaborative QI projects is driven by a variety of barriers and facilitators. The interactions between the senior manager, quality improvement teams, and healthcare professionals generate attitudes that modulate motivation. Thus, these aspects should be considered during the implementation of such projects. Future research could explore the cost-effectiveness of motivational approaches.

Mejora de la calidad de la atención a pacientes con sepsis en el contexto de un servicio de emergencia / Melhoria da qualidade do atendimento a pacientes com sepse no contexto de um serviço de emergencia / Improving the quality of care for patients with sepsis in the context of an emergency service

Objetivo: Describir el proceso de implementación de una intervención participativa y multifacética para mejorar la atención de la sepsis y sus efectos en la mejora de la calidad de la atención. Materiales y métodos: Se trata de un estudio cuasi-experimental del tipo antes-después realizado en 2017/2018 en el servicio de urgencias de un hospital del noreste de Brasil. La calidad de la atención de 564 pacientes diagnosticados con sepsis, se evaluó utilizando nueve criterios de proceso y un criterio de resultado. La intervención fue participativa y multifacética, con una duración de 10 meses. Resultados: Después de la intervención, el número de incumplimientos disminuyó en un 67% (843 vs 506), y los 10 criterios mejoraron, con una mejora significativa (p <0,05) en ocho de ellos. La letalidad disminuyó en un 10% (p = 0,005). Conclusión: El modelo de intervención presentado fue eficaz para mejorar la calidad de la atención de la sepsis en el servicio de urgencias, con la posibilidad de ampliar su uso en los hospitales brasileños. (AU)

Objective: To describe the process of implementing a participatory and multifaceted intervention to improve sepsis care and its effects on improving the quality of care. Materials and methods: This is a before-after quasi-experimental study conducted in 2017/2018 in the emergency service of a hospital in Northeast Brazil. The quality of care of 564 patients diagnosed with sepsis was assessed using nine process criteria and one result criterion. The intervention was participatory and multifaceted, being applied for 10 months. Results: After the intervention, the number of non-conformities decreased by 67% (843 vs 506), and all 10 criteria improved, with a significant improvement (p<0.05) in eight of them. Lethality decreased by 10% (p=0.005). Conclusion: The intervention model presented was effective in improving the quality of care for sepsis in the emergency service, with the possibility of scaling up its use in Brazilian hospitals. (AU)

Objetivo: Descrever o processo de implementação de uma intervenção participativa e multifacetada para melhorar o atendimento à sepse e seus efeitos na melhoria da qualidade do atendimento. Materiais e métodos: Trata-se de um estudo quase-experimental do tipo antes-depois realizado em 2017/2018 no serviço de emergência de um hospital do Nordeste do Brasil. A qualidade do atendimento de 564 pacientes com diagnóstico de sepse foi avaliada por meio de nove critérios de processo e um critério de resultado. A intervenção foi participativa e multifacetada, com duração de 10 meses. Resultados: Após a intervenção, o número de não conformidades diminuiu 67% (843 vs 506), e todos os 10 critérios melhoraram, com uma melhoria significativa (p <0,05) em oito deles. A letalidade diminuiu 10% (p = 0,005). Conclusão: O modelo de intervenção apresentado foi eficaz na melhoria da qualidade do atendimento à sepse no serviço de emergência, com possibilidade de ampliar sua utilização nos hospitais brasileiros. (AU)

Validation of the QualiPresc instrument for assessing the quality of drug prescription writing in primary health care.

INTRODUCTION: Adverse events related to drug prescriptions are the main patient safety issue in primary care; however there is a lack of validated instruments for assessing the quality of prescription writing, which covers the prescriber, the patient and the drug information. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate the QualiPresc instrument to assess and monitor the quality of drug prescriptions in primary care, accompanied by a self-instruction direction, with the goal of filling the gap in validated instruments to assess the quality of prescription writing. METHODOLOGY: A validation study conducted in a municipality in Northeastern Brazil, based on prescriptions prepared in January 2021 by physicians assigned to 18 Basic Health Units and filed in 6 distribution/dispensing units. Four steps were covered: 1) Analysis of content validity of each indicator (relevance and adequacy); 2) Analysis of reliability via intra and inter-rater agreement of each indicator; 3) Analysis of the utility of each indicator; 4) Construction and analysis of the reliability of a weighted composite indicator based on effectiveness and safety scores for each indicator. RESULTS: Twenty-nine potential indicators were listed, but only 13 were approved for validity, reliability and usefulness. Twelve indicators were excluded because of validity (<90% validity index) and four because they were not useful in the context of the study. Three weighted composite indicators were tested, but only one was approved for reliability and usefulness. The validated instrument therefore contains 13 indicators and 1 weighted composite indicator. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the validity, reliability and usefulness of QualiPresc for the evaluation of prescription writing in the context of primary care. Application to contexts such as secondary care and tertiary care requires cross-cultural adaptation and new content validity. Educators, managers and health care professionals can access QualiPresc online, free of charge, to assess performance and provide feedback involving drug prescribers.

The WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist implementation: impact on the prescription of magnesium sulphate through a one-year longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: Preeclampsia is a relatively frequent condition during pregnancy and childbirth. The administration of magnesium sulphate as a prophylactic and treatment measure is an evidence-based practice for eclampsia; however, it is not consistently used, compromising the health of pregnant women. This study aimed to assess compliance with recommendations of the International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy (ISSHP) for the use of MgSO4 in pregnant women with preeclampsia, before and after the implementation of the World Health Organization Safe Childbirth Checklist (SCC). METHODS: This quasi-experimental study was conducted between July 2015 and July 2016 at a third-level maternity hospital in northeastern Brazil, where the SCC was implemented. Compliance (underuse and overuse of MgSO4) was assessed in biweekly samples of 30 deliveries assessed 6 months before and 6 months after SCC implementation, using indicators based on international guidelines. A total of 720 deliveries were assessed over 1 year using an ad hoc application for reviewing medical records. Aggregated adequate use was estimated for the study period, and the time series measurements were compared to a control chart to assess change. RESULTS: The incidence of preeclampsia was 39.9% (287/720). Among these, 64.8% (186/287) had severe signs or symptoms and needed MgSO4. Underuse (no prescription when needed) of MgSO4 was observed in 74.7% (139/186) of women who needed the drug. Considering all women, non-compliance with the prescription protocol (underuse and overuse) was 20.0% (144/720). After introducing the SCC, the use of MgSO4 in women with preeclampsia with severe features increased from 19.1 to 34.2% (p = 0.025). Longitudinal analysis showed a significant (p < 0.05) ascending curve of adequate use of MgSO4 after the SCC was implemented. CONCLUSIONS: Compliance with recommendations for the use of MgSO4 in preeclampsia was low, but improved after implementation of the SCC. Interventions to improve compliance based on diagnosis and treatment reminders may help in the implementation of this good practice.

Quality of Care In Nursing Homes In Brazil.

BACKGROUND: There is an increased demand for nursing homes (NHs) in middle-income countries such as Brazil. To monitor the quality of NHs, there is a need for reliable instruments to assess the extent to which the care provided meets the expectations and rights of residents and their families. PURPOSE: To evaluate the reliability, applicability, and measurement results of an instrument for assessing the quality of NH care assessment. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study in 31 NHs, applying the Observable Indicators of Nursing Home Care Quality Instrument (OINHQ) adapted to the Brazilian context. The instrument includes 30 infrastructure and process indicators measured by direct observation grouped into seven domains: Communication; Care Delivery; Grooming; Odors; Environment-Basic; Environment-Access; and Environment-Homelike. To assess feasibility and reliability, 3 pairs of raters with different profiles (health professionals, health inspectors, and potential residents) were independently involved in data collection. We calculated Cronbach α for internal consistency of the instrument, Overall Agreement Index (OAI), and Prevalence-Adjusted Bias-Adjusted Kappa (PABAκ) for interrater reliability and analyzed the baseline NH quality through individual indicators, dimensions, and facilities. RESULTS: The OINHQ was in general reliable, with good internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.93) and interrater agreement (mean OAI = 75%; PABAκ = 0.49). NH quality is not homogeneous (overall mean = 2.9, ranging by facility between 1.9 and 3.7, on a scale of 1-5). Process-related indicators (mean = 2.7) are generally worse than structure-related indicators (mean = 3.5). The best domains were associated with Odors (mean = 4.1) and Grooming (mean = 3.9), whereas the priority domains for receiving improvement interventions were Care Delivery (mean = 2.0) and Environment-Homelike (mean = 2.5). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline evaluation of NH quality shows remarkable variability among facilities and ample room for improvement.