Effect of Audit and Feedback on Physician Adherence to Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pneumonia and Sepsis

Abstract

The objective was to estimate the effect of feedback with blinded peer comparison on emergency physician adherence to guidelines for appropriate antibiotic administration for inpatient pneumonia and completion of the 3-hour Surviving Sepsis Bundle for severe sepsis. The authors performed a quasi-experiment using a stepped wedge design at a single urban safety net hospital. Attending emergency physicians were randomized into 6 clusters. Once a cluster crossed into the intervention group, physicians in that cluster began receiving detailed feedback with blinded peer comparison on their adherence to guidelines for pneumonia and sepsis. Feedback with blinded peer comparison significantly improved guideline adherence from 52% without feedback to 65% with feedback (difference = 13%, 95% confidence interval = 4% to 22%). In adjusted analyses, the odds of providing guideline adherent care were 1.8 (95% confidence interval = 1.01-3.2) after the introduction of feedback with blinded peer comparison. Feedback with blinded peer comparison significantly improved emergency physician guideline adherence.

Keywords

guideline adherence feedback peer comparison emergency medicine infectious disease

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Lenfant

Shattuck lecture—clinical research to clinical practice—lost in translation?

N Engl J Med. 2003;349:868-874.

Auerbach

Landefeld

Shojania

KG.

The tension between needing to improve care and knowing how to do it. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:608-613.

Shojania

Grimshaw

JM.

Evidence-based quality improvement: the state of the science. Health Aff (Millwood). 2005;24:138-150.

Persell

Friedberg

Meeker

et al . Use of behavioral economics and social psychology to improve treatment of acute respiratory infections (BEARI): rationale and design of a cluster randomized controlled trial [1RC4AG039115-01]—study protocol and baseline practice and provider characteristics. BMC Infect Dis. 2013;13:290.

Kiefe

Allison

Williams

Person

Weaver

Weissman

NW.

Improving quality improvement using achievable benchmarks for physician feedback: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2001;285:2871-2879.

Dolan

Hallsworth

Halpern

King

Metcalfe

Vlaev

Influencing behaviour: the mindspace way. J Econ Psychol. 2012;33:264-277.

Ivers

Jamtvedt

Flottorp

et al . Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;(6):CD000259.

Ivers

Grimshaw

Jamtvedt

et al . Growing literature, stagnant science? Systematic review, meta-regression and cumulative analysis of audit and feedback interventions in health care. J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29:1534-1541.

Jamtvedt

Young

Kristoffersen

O’Brien

Oxman

AD.

Does telling people what they have been doing change what they do? A systematic review of the effects of audit and feedback. Qual Saf Health Care. 2006;15:433-436.

10.

Trent

Susalla

Ginde

Havranek

Haukoos

JS.

Room for improvement: emergency department adherence to the Surviving Sepsis Campaign’s 3 hour bundle. Presented at: Society for Academic Emergency Medicine; May 18, 2017; Orlando, Florida.

11.

Trent

Susalla

Jarou

Ginde

Havranek

Haukoos

JS.

Variation in emergency department adherence to treatment guidelines for pneumonia and severe sepsis. Presented at: Society of Academic Emergency Medicine; May 18, 2017; Orlando, Florida.

12.

Kang

Shin

et al . Factors influencing compliance with early resuscitation bundle in the management of severe sepsis and septic shock. Shock. 2012;38:474-479.

13.

Leisman

Wie

Doerfler

et al . Association of fluid resuscitation initiation within 30 minutes of severe sepsis and septic shock recognition with reduced mortality and length of stay. Ann Emerg Med. 2016;68:298-311.

14.

Leisman

Doerfler

Ward

et al . Survival benefit and cost savings from compliance with a simplified 3-hour sepsis bundle in a series of prospective, multisite, observational cohorts. Crit Care Med. 2017;45:395-406.

15.

Coba

Whitmill

Mooney

et al . Resuscitation bundle compliance in severe sepsis and septic shock: improves survival, is better late than never. J Intensive Care Med. 2011;26:304-313.

16.

van Zanten

Brinkman

Arbous

et al . Guideline bundles adherence and mortality in severe sepsis and septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2014;42:1890-1898.

17.

Levy

Artigas

Phillips

et al . Outcomes of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign in intensive care units in the USA and Europe: a prospective cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2012;12:919-924.

18.

Levy

Rhodes

Phillips

et al . Surviving Sepsis Campaign: association between performance metrics and outcomes in a 7.5-year study. Crit Care Med. 2015;43:3-12.

19.

Berg

Vasquez

Hale

Nyberg

Moran

DA.

Evaluation of process variations in noncompliance in the implementation of evidence-based sepsis care. J Healthc Qual. 2013;35(1):60-69.

20.

Capelastegui

Espana

Quintana

et al . Improvement of process-of-care and outcomes after implementing a guideline for the management of community-acquired pneumonia: a controlled before-and-after design study. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;39:955-963.

21.

Halm

Atlas

Borowsky

et al . Understanding physician adherence with a pneumonia practice guideline: effects of patient, system, and physician factors. Arch Intern Med. 2000;160:98-104.

22.

The Joint Commission. Core Measure Sets: Pneumonia. http://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/6/Pneumonia.pdf. Accessed April 23, 2018.

23.

Rhodes

Evans

Alhazzani

et al . Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock: 2016. Intensive Care Med. 2017;43:304-377.

24.

Kaji

Schriger

Green

Looking through the retrospectoscope: reducing bias in emergency medicine chart review studies. Ann Emerg Med. 2014;64:292-298.

25.

Gilbert

Lowenstein

Koziol-McLain

Barta

Steiner

Chart reviews in emergency medicine research: where are the methods?

Ann Emerg Med. 1996;27:305-308.

26.

Hussey

Hughes

JP.

Design and analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2007;28:182-191.

27.

Hemming

Lilford

Girling

AJ.

Stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trials: a generic framework including parallel and multiple-level designs. Stat Med. 2015;34:181-196.

28.

Woertman

de Hoop

Moerbeek

Zuidema

Gerritsen

Teerenstra

Stepped wedge designs could reduce the required sample size in cluster randomized trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:752-758.

29.

Selby

Schmittdiel

Lee

et al . Meaningful variation in performance: what does variation in quality tell us about improving quality? Med Care. 2010;48:133-139.

30.

Campbell

Fayers

Grimshaw

JM.

Determinants of the intracluster correlation coefficient in cluster randomized trials: the case of implementation research. Clin Trials. 2005;2:99-107.

31.

Emond

Calsbeek

Teerenstra

et al . Improving the implementation of perioperative safety guidelines using a multifaceted intervention approach: protocol of the IMPROVE study, a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial. Implement Sci. 2015;10(1):3.

32.

Pepper

Jaswal

Sun

Welsh

Natanson

Eichacker

PQ.

Evidence underpinning the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ severe sepsis and septic shock management bundle (SEP-1): a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2018;168:558-568.

33.

Pro

Yealy

Kellum

et al . A randomized trial of protocol-based care for early septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:1683-1693.

34.

Mouncey

Osborn

Power

et al . Trial of early, goal-directed resuscitation for septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:1301-1311.

35.

Peake

Delaney

Bailey

et al . Goal-directed resuscitation for patients with early septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:1496-1506.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.23 MB