Stollings Joanna L, Foss Julie J, Ely E Wesley, Ambrose Anna M, Rice Todd W, Girard Timothy D, Wheeler Arthur P
Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Ann Pharmacother. 2015 Aug;49(8):883-91. doi: 10.1177/1060028015582050. Epub 2015 Apr 23.
Coordinating efforts across disciplines in the intensive care unit is a key component of quality improvement (QI) efforts. Spontaneous awakening trials (SATs) and spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs) are considered key components of guidelines, yet unfortunately are often not done or coordinated properly.
To determine if a pharmacist-driven awakening and breathing coordination (ABC) QI program would improve compliance (ie, process measures) as compared with the previous protocol, which did not involve pharmacists.
The QI program included pharmacist-led education, daily discussion on rounds, and weekly performance reports to staff. Using a pre-QI versus during-QI versus post-QI intervention design, we compared data from 500 control ventilator-days (pre-QI period) versus 580 prospective ventilator-days (during-QI period). We then evaluated the sustainability of the QI program in 216 ventilator-days in the post-QI period.
SAT safety screens were performed on only 20% pre-QI patient-days versus 97% of during-QI patient-days (P < 0.001) and 100% of post-QI patient-days (P = 0.25). The rates of passing the SAT safety screen in pre-QI and during-QI periods were 63% versus 78% (P = 0.03) and 81% in the post-QI period (P = 0.86). The rates of SATs among eligible patients on continuous infusions were only 53% in the pre-QI versus 85% in the during-QI (P = 0.0001) and 87% in the post-QI (P = 1) periods.
In this QI initiative, a pharmacist-driven, interdisciplinary ABC protocol significantly improved process measures compliance, comparing the pre-QI versus during-QI rates of screening, performing, and coordinating SAT and SBTs, and these results were sustained in the 8-month follow-up period post-QI program.
在重症监护病房跨学科协调工作是质量改进(QI)工作的关键组成部分。自主唤醒试验(SATs)和自主呼吸试验(SBTs)被认为是指南的关键组成部分,但不幸的是,它们常常未得到实施或协调不当。
确定与之前不涉及药剂师的方案相比,由药剂师推动的唤醒与呼吸协调(ABC)QI方案是否能提高依从性(即过程指标)。
QI方案包括药剂师主导的教育、查房时的每日讨论以及向工作人员提供的每周绩效报告。采用QI前与QI期间与QI后干预设计,我们比较了500个对照机械通气日(QI前期)与580个前瞻性机械通气日(QI期间)的数据。然后我们在QI后期的216个机械通气日评估了QI方案的可持续性。
在QI前期,仅20%的患者日进行了SAT安全筛查,而在QI期间这一比例为97%(P<0.001),在QI后期为100%(P = 0.25)。在QI前期和QI期间通过SAT安全筛查的比例分别为63%和78%(P = 0.03),在QI后期为81%(P = 0.86)。在持续输注的符合条件患者中,QI前期的SAT实施率仅为53%,而QI期间为85%(P = 0.0001),QI后期为87%(P = 1)。
在这项QI举措中,与QI前期相比,由药剂师推动的跨学科ABC方案显著提高了过程指标的依从性,包括筛查、实施和协调SAT及SBT的比例,并且这些结果在QI方案后的8个月随访期内得以维持。