Departments of International Health (Drs Stierman and Creanga) and Health Policy and Management (Drs Engineer and Berenholtz), Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland; Oklahoma Perinatal Quality Improvement Collaborative, Oklahoma City, (Mss O'Brien and Ouk); The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City (Mss O'Brien and Ouk); Community Health Improvement Division, Texas Department of State Health Services, Austin (Ms Stagg); Alliance for Innovation on Maternal Health, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Washington, District of Columbia (Ms Alon); Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland (Drs Engineer, Benishek, Latif, and Berenholtz, Ms Liu, and Mr Terhorst); Departments of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine (Drs Engineer, Benishek, Latif, and Berenholtz) and Gynecology and Obstetrics (Dr Creanga), Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, Maryland (Drs Fabiyi and Mistry and Mss Chew and Harding).
Qual Manag Health Care. 2023;32(3):177-188. doi: 10.1097/QMH.0000000000000407. Epub 2023 Mar 7.
The purpose of this study was to describe statewide perinatal quality improvement (QI) activities, specifically implementation of Alliance for Innovation on Maternal Health (AIM) patient safety bundles and use of teamwork and communication tools in obstetric units in Oklahoma and Texas.
In January-February 2020, we conducted a survey of AIM-enrolled hospitals in Oklahoma (n = 35) and Texas (n = 120) to gather data on obstetric unit organization and QI processes. Data were linked to hospital characteristics information from the 2019 American Hospital Association survey and hospitals' maternity levels of care from state agencies. We generated descriptive statistics for each state and created an index to summarize adoption of QI processes. We fitted linear regression models to examine how this index varied by hospital characteristics and self-reported ratings for patient safety and AIM bundle implementation.
Most obstetric units had standardized clinical processes for obstetric hemorrhage (94% Oklahoma; 97% Texas), massive transfusion (94% Oklahoma; 97% Texas), and severe hypertension in pregnancy (97% Oklahoma; 80% Texas); regularly conducted simulation drills for obstetric emergencies (89% Oklahoma; 92% Texas); had multidisciplinary QI committees (61% Oklahoma; 83% Texas); and conducted debriefs after major obstetric complications (45% Oklahoma; 86% Texas). Few obstetric units offered recent staff training on teamwork and communication to their staff (6% Oklahoma; 22% Texas); those who did were more likely to employ specific strategies to facilitate communication, escalate concerns, and manage staff conflicts. Overall, adoption of QI processes was significantly higher in hospitals in urban than rural areas, teaching than nonteaching, offering higher levels of maternity care, with more staff per shift, and greater delivery volume (all P < .05). The QI adoption index scores were strongly associated with respondents' ratings for patient safety and implementation of maternal safety bundles (both P < .001).
Adoption of QI processes varies across obstetric units in Oklahoma and Texas, with implications for implementing future perinatal QI initiatives. Notably, findings highlight the need to reinforce support for rural obstetric units, which often face greater barriers to implementing patient safety and QI processes than urban units.
本研究旨在描述俄克拉荷马州和德克萨斯州全州围产期质量改进(QI)活动,特别是实施联盟创新母婴健康(AIM)患者安全套餐以及在产科单位使用团队合作和沟通工具的情况。
2020 年 1 月至 2 月,我们对俄克拉荷马州(n=35)和德克萨斯州(n=120)的 AIM 注册医院进行了调查,以收集产科单位组织和 QI 流程的数据。数据与 2019 年美国医院协会调查中的医院特征信息以及州机构的医院产科护理水平相关联。我们对每个州生成了描述性统计数据,并创建了一个指数来总结 QI 流程的采用情况。我们拟合了线性回归模型,以检验该指数如何因医院特征和自我报告的患者安全和 AIM 套餐实施评分而变化。
大多数产科单位有针对产科出血(俄克拉荷马州 94%;德克萨斯州 97%)、大量输血(俄克拉荷马州 94%;德克萨斯州 97%)和妊娠重度高血压(俄克拉荷马州 97%;德克萨斯州 80%)的标准化临床流程;经常进行产科急症模拟演练(俄克拉荷马州 89%;德克萨斯州 92%);有多学科 QI 委员会(俄克拉荷马州 61%;德克萨斯州 83%);并在发生重大产科并发症后进行情况汇报(俄克拉荷马州 45%;德克萨斯州 86%)。很少有产科单位最近向其员工提供团队合作和沟通方面的培训(俄克拉荷马州 6%;德克萨斯州 22%);那些提供培训的单位更有可能采用特定策略来促进沟通、上报问题和管理员工冲突。总体而言,城市医院的 QI 流程采用率明显高于农村医院,教学医院高于非教学医院,提供更高水平的产科护理,每班有更多的员工,分娩量更大(均 P<.05)。QI 采用指数评分与受访者对患者安全和实施孕产妇安全套餐的评分高度相关(均 P<.001)。
俄克拉荷马州和德克萨斯州的产科单位在 QI 流程的采用方面存在差异,这对实施未来围产期 QI 计划具有影响。值得注意的是,调查结果强调需要加强对农村产科单位的支持,这些单位在实施患者安全和 QI 流程方面往往面临比城市单位更大的障碍。