Structure, Process, and Culture Differences of Pediatric Trauma Centers Participating in an International Comparative Effectiveness Study of Children with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

Gitte Y Larsen, Michelle Schober, Anthony Fabio, Stephen R Wisniewski, Mary Jo C Grant, Nadeem Shafi, Tellen D Bennett, Deborah Hirtz, Michael J Bell, Gitte Y Larsen, Michelle Schober, Anthony Fabio, Stephen R Wisniewski, Mary Jo C Grant, Nadeem Shafi, Tellen D Bennett, Deborah Hirtz, Michael J Bell

Abstract

Background: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is an important worldwide cause of death and disability for children. The Approaches and Decisions for Acute Pediatric TBI (ADAPT) Trial is an observational, cohort study to compare the effectiveness of six aspects of TBI care. Understanding the differences between clinical sites-including their structure, clinical processes, and culture differences-will be necessary to assess differences in outcome from the study and can inform the overall community regarding differences across academic centers.

Methods: We developed a survey and queried ADAPT site principal investigators with a focus on six domains: (i) hospital, (ii) pediatric intensive care unit (PICU), (iii) medical staff characteristics, (iv) quality of care, (v) medication safety, and (vi) safety culture. Summary statistics were used to describe differences between centers.

Results: ADAPT clinical sites that enrolled a subject within the first year (32 US-based, 11 international) were studied. A wide variation in site characteristics was observed in hospital and ICU characteristics, including an almost sevenfold range in ICU size (8-55 beds) and more than fivefold range of overall ICU admissions (537-2623). Nursing staffing (predominantly 1:1 or 1:2) and the presence of pharmacists within the ICU (79 %) were less variable, and most sites "strongly agreed" or "agreed" that Neurosurgery and Critical Care teams worked well together (81.4 %). However, a minority of sites (46 %) used an explicit protocol for treatment of children with severe TBI care.

Conclusions: We found a variety of inter-center structure, process, and culture differences. These intrinsic differences between sites may begin to explain why interventional studies have failed to prove efficacy of experimental therapies. Understanding these differences may be an important factor in analyzing future ADAPT trial results and in determining best practices for pediatric severe TBI.

Keywords: Comparative effectiveness research; Pediatric neurocritical care; Pediatric traumatic brain injury; Quality of care; Secondary injuries.

References

    1. Langlois JA, Rutland-Brown W, Thomas KE. The incidence of traumatic brain injury among children in the United States: differences by race. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2005;20(3):229–238.
    1. Tosetti P, et al. Toward an international initiative for traumatic brain injury research. J Neurotrauma. 2013;30(14):1211–1222.
    1. Sox HC, Greenfield S. Comparative effectiveness research: a report from the Institute of Medicine. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(3):203–205.
    1. Lingsma HF, et al. Large between-center differences in outcome after moderate and severe traumatic brain injury in the international mission on prognosis and clinical trial design in traumatic brain injury (IMPACT) study. Neurosurgery. 2011;68(3):601–607. discussion 607-8.
    1. Dodek PM, et al. Structure, process, and outcome of all intensive care units within the province of British Columbia, Canada. J Intensive Care Med. 2010;25(3):149–155.
    1. Donabedian A, et al. The quality of care. How can it be assessed? JAMA. 1988;260(12):1743–1748.
    1. Peterson TH, Teman SF, Connors RH. A safety culture transformation: its effects at a children's hospital. J Patient Saf. 2012;8(3):125–130.
    1. Sakr Y, et al. The Impact of Hospital and ICU Organizational Factors on Outcome in Critically Ill Patients: Results From the Extended Prevalence of Infection in Intensive Care Study. Crit Care Med. 2014
    1. Pronovost PJ, et al. Evaluation of the culture of safety: survey of clinicians and managers in an academic medical center. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003;12(6):405–410.
    1. Isaac T, et al. The relationship between patients' perception of care and measures of hospital quality and safety. Health Serv Res. 2010;45(4):1024–1040.
    1. Najjar-Pellet J, et al. Quality assessment in intensive care units: proposal for a scoring system in terms of structure and process. Intensive Care Med. 2008;34(2):278–285.
    1. Clifton GL, et al. Hypothermia on admission in patients with severe brain injury. J Neurotrauma. 2002;19(3):293–301.
    1. Clifton GL, et al. Lack of effect of induction of hypothermia after acute brain injury. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(8):556–563.
    1. Bell MJ, et al. Differences in medical therapy goals for children with severe traumatic brain injury-an international study. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2013;14(8):811–818.
    1. Corrigan J, et al., editors. Institute of Medicine and Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century, ed. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 2001. p. 360.
    1. Pronovost PJ, et al. Organizational characteristics of intensive care units related to outcomes of abdominal aortic surgery. JAMA. 1999;281(14):1310–1317.
    1. Vigorito MC, et al. Improving safety culture results in Rhode Island ICUs: lessons learned from the development of action-oriented plans. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2011;37(11):509–514.
    1. Mills B, et al. Facility characteristics and inhospital pediatric mortality after severe traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma. 2015;32(11):841–846.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir