Safe Critical Care: Testing Improvement Strategies

December 8, 2015 updated by: Theodore Speroff, Vanderbilt University
One group of hospitals participated in a collaborative approach for healthcare quality improvement while another group was provided only a tool kit. The investigators' objective was to determine if the Collaborative would perform better at preventing central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) and ventilator-associated pneumonias (VAP). Hospitals were randomized to the Tool Kit or Collaborative conditions. The investigators' study evaluated the effects on care processes and outcomes of a multi-institutional quality improvement initiative focused on preventing hospital associate infections. The investigators' hypothesis was that the strategies for implementing safe critical care practice will differ in level of achievement whereby the Collaborative group will perform better than the Tool Kit group. The outcome measure comprised clinical event rates and an index of safe practices that represent a bundling of key process measures related to evidence-based practices for preventing catheter-related blood-stream infections and ventilator-associated pneumonia in the intensive care unit.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Continuous quality improvement (CQI) methodologies provide a framework for initiating and sustaining improvements in complex systems.1 By definition, CQI engages frontline staff in iterative problem solving using plan-do-study-act cycles of learning, with decision-making based on real-time process measurements. The Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) has sponsored Breakthrough Series (BTS) Collaboratives since 1996 to accelerate the uptake and impact of quality improvement. These collaboratives are typically guided by evidence-based clinical practice guidelines, incorporate change methodologies, and rely on clinical and process improvement subject matter experts. Organizations have been adopting the collaborative model, and there is a growing literature on its positive impact. This collaborative approach to healthcare improvement has appealing face validity but lacks definitive evidence of its effectiveness. A recent derivative of collaboratives has been deployment of tool kits for quality improvement. Intuition suggests that such tools kits may help to enable change, and, thus some agencies advocate the simpler approach of disseminating tool kits as a change strategy. We sought to compare the collaborative model with the tool kit model for improving care. Recommendations and guidelines for central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) prevention have not been implemented reliably, resulting in unnecessary ICU morbidity and mortality and fostering a national call for improvement. Our study evaluated the effects on care processes and outcomes of a multi-institutional quality improvement initiative focused on preventing CLABSI and VAP in the intensive care unit (ICU).

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

59

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • United States
    • Tennessee
      • Nashville, Tennessee, United States, 37203
        • HCA Hospital Corporation of America

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

1 year and older (ADULT, OLDER_ADULT, CHILD)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Medical centers with at least one adult or pediatric ICU.
  • Medical centers within the Hospital Corporation of America (HCA) were eligible for enrollment.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Nonresponse to invitation to participate in our Safe Critical Care Initiative.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
  • Allocation: RANDOMIZED
  • Interventional Model: PARALLEL
  • Masking: NONE

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
EXPERIMENTAL: Collaborative Group
Quality Improvement Virtual Learning Collaborative with Interactive Teleconferences and Tool Kit
Behavioral: Collaborative Group
In addition to the Tool Kit materials and web site support, facility leaders and managers in this group agreed to participate in a Collaborative to improve critical care. The Collaborative differed from the IHI BTS model in that teams did not come together for face-to-face educational and planning sessions but instead attended web seminars and teleconferences. Between these "virtual" learning sessions, teams implemented some of the suggested change ideas, measured the results of those changes, and reported back to the larger group. Teams were supported through monthly educational and troubleshooting conference calls, individual coaching by faculty members, and an e-mail listserver designed to stimulate interaction among teams.
Other Names:
  • Collaborative Breakthrough Groups
  • Collaborative Quality Improvement Groups
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: Tool Kit Group
Tool Kit of Evidence-Based Guidelines, Education Seminars, and Aide for Quality Improvement Methods
Behavioral: Tool Kit
Hospitals received a tool kit:evidence-based guidelines, CLABSI/VAP fact sheets, change ideas,quality improvement and teamwork methods, standardized data collection and charting tools. Periodic reminders of their commitment to the Safe Critical Care Initiative and access to web site containing all of the educational seminars, clinical tools, and quality improvement tools. ICUs in this group were on their own to initiate and implement a local hospital quality improvement initiative preventing CLABSI and VAP.
Other Names:
  • Quality Improvement

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
CLABSI and VAP Rates
Time Frame: 18 Months: 3-month baseline and quarterly post-intervention periods
Central line associated bloodstream infections(CLABSI) and ventilator associated pneumonias (VAP) using Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definitions as number of events per 1,000 device days, data collection and surveillance methods.
18 Months: 3-month baseline and quarterly post-intervention periods

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Access of Tools and Use of Quality Improvement Strategies
Time Frame: 18 months
Follow-up survey of ICU nurse and quality managers for all participating medical centers from Jan 2008 through April 2008 included questions about the implementation of process interventions: Access and use of clinical guidelines tools, access and use of quality improvement tools, and types of quality improvement implementation strategies.
18 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Vanderbilt University

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Theodore Speroff, PhD, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

February 1, 2006

Primary Completion (ACTUAL)

April 1, 2008

Study Completion (ACTUAL)

April 1, 2008

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

September 10, 2009

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 11, 2009

First Posted (ESTIMATE)

September 14, 2009

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (ESTIMATE)

January 12, 2016

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

December 8, 2015

Last Verified

December 1, 2015

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • VU050413
  • AHRQ U18 HS015934 (OTHER_GRANT: AHRQ U18 015934)

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Ventilator Associated Pneumonia

Clinical Trials on Collaborative Group

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

CROs by country

CROs in Malaysia

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

3
Subscribe