Using Teamwork to Improve Patient Outcomes
Transcription
Using Teamwork to Improve Patient Outcomes
sccm.org/criticalconnections • facebook.com/SCCM1 • twitter.com/SCCM Volume 14, Number 1 February/March 2015 Critical Connections The Complete News Source for Critical Care Professionals Thank you for your membership in the Society of Critical Care Medicine. Learn more about the benefits of membership at www.sccm.org or call +1 847 827-6888. In This Issue… Team Science Learn about useful methods and tools that can be used to assess effective collaboration in healthcare settings. . . 6 Examine the efficacy of team-based training and the nuances of instituting team training programs . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Explore the role of simulation in promoting multidisciplinary teamwork. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Clinical Spotlight Using Teamwork to Improve Patient Outcomes A team includes two or more people interacting interdependently toward a common goal. In the intensive care unit (ICU), the common goal is improved patient outcomes, often thought of as survival or discharge from the ICU. Additional goals such as liberation from mechanical ventilation and patient safety (prevention of adverse events) should not be overlooked, though. Teams may be formed across medical specialties or disciplines, and in the ICU often include physicians, nurses, pharmacists, respiratory therapists, dieticians, physical therapists, social workers, and others. Each of these caregivers has a specific role in patient care, and each can contribute positively to patient outcomes. In light of the benefits of multiprofessional critical care teams to patients and their families, team-based care is expressly included in the Society of Critical Care Medicine’s (SCCM) envisioned future statement and guiding principles for the organization and members.1 “Using Teamwork to Improve Patient Outcomes” p 7 SCCM Stalwart Inger Margareta Grenvik Passes The Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) lost a member of its family earlier this year. Inger Margareta Grenvik, beloved wife of founding Society member and past president, Ake Grenvik, MD, PhD, MCCM, passed away on January 21 at the age of 83. “The Society has lost a giant,” said Society President Craig M. Coopersmith, MD, FCCM. “Inger was an important member of our SCCM family from the very beginnings of the organization.” Her contributions, he added, “will never be forgotten.” Inger was born in Stockholm, Sweden, on Sept. 14, 1931. After completing a then traditional all-girls school, she received an associate degree in medical technology at the Karolinska Institute. Inger and Ake married on May 31, 1952. Lifelong partners, Inger provided unconditional support as Ake revolutionized the field of critical care medicine through his prolific clinical research and integral role in founding the Society. “Inger Grenvik was a truly special contributor to SCCM and its mission,” said Patrick M. Kochanek, MD, MCCM, Ake N. Grenvik Professor of Critical Care Medicine at the University “SCCM Stalwart Inger Margareta Grenvik Passes” p5 Registration Now Open for the Adult Multiprofessional Critical Care Board Review Course August 11-15, 2015 Fairmont Chicago, Millennium Park Chicago, Illinois, USA Visit www.sccm.org/adultboardreview for details. Figure 1. individual or team. The focus should be on continuous improvement, which may require interventions at multiple levels. So far we have considered the assessment knowledge, skills and attitudes of teams and individual members. The relevant outcome measures for overall team performance can be considered using the input-process-output framework2 (Figure 1). Measurable inputs influencing team performance include: attributes of team members, including their knowledge, skills and attitudes relevant to teamwork and communication; the task at hand; environmental resources (e.g., availability of checklists, scheduled team briefings); and the organizational culture in which the team functions (e.g., valuing democracy in teams). Observable behaviors, as measured by teamwork measurement tools, and compliance with established protocols are process measures. Output measures include: patient outcomes (complications, length of hospital stay, 30-day mortality); use of time and resources; and impact on staff (staff morale, staff retention). Mazzocco et al24 developed the Behavioral Marker Risk Index, a simple instrument to measure teamwork in operating room teams, and found an association between index scores and the rate of adverse patient events, suggesting a clear link between teamwork process measures and patient outcomes. Input-Process-Output Framework for Measuring Team Performance2 Input Process Output Individual attributes Teamwork behaviors Patient outcomes Team composition Compliance with protocols Resource utilization The task Staff satisfaction Environmental resources Organizational culture Conclusion The purpose of assessing teamwork and communication is to improve team performance. Effective teamwork and communication depend on the knowledge, skills and attitudes of individual team members, their ability to form teams, and an enabling environment and organizational culture. Instruments to measure teamwork can: 1) help individuals and workgroups acquire the skills and behaviors of effective teams, and 2) demonstrate improvement following interventions. The aim of improving team performance is to produce better outcomes for patients, and assessment of the quality and safety of patient care is the ultimate yardstick against which to measure and drive improvement in teamwork and communication. References and disclosures are available at www.sccm.org/criticalconnections. Jennifer Weller, MD, MBBS, MClinEd, FANZCA, is an associate professor of medical education at the University of Auckland, New Zealand, and a consultant anesthesiologist at Auckland City Hospital. “Using Teamwork to Improve Patient Outcomes” continued from p1 Teamwork can be described in many ways, but researchers have utilized an input, process/mediator and output framework to describe ICU team performance. In this framework, team and task characteristics are components of the inputs, transition and action processes are components of the process/mediator, and patient or team outcomes are components of the outputs.2 Examples of transition processes include multidisciplinary patient care rounds and use of daily goals checklists. Patient care rounds are an important team activity where the patient’s plan of care is discussed formally and tasks prioritized. Initiation of patient care rounds has been associated with positive patient outcomes. For example, implementation of daily multidisciplinary rounds by the nursing staff, a physician, and a respiratory therapist to review a checklist of ventilator bundle goals for each patient decreased the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) from 1.5 per month to 0.5 per month in a study of surgical trauma ICU patients.3 Similar findings of a reduced VAP incidence with the institution of multidisciplinary patient care rounds were also observed in an open trauma ICU.4 Daily patient care rounds led by an intensivist have been associated with decreases in hospital length of stay (LOS), hospital costs and postoperative complications.5 Additionally, nurses’ reports of collaboration with physicians on the decision to transfer patients out of the ICU were positively associated with patient mortality.6 Completion of a daily patient-centered goals form during multiprofessional rounds was associated with an increase in the understanding of daily goals (>85% of nurses and medical residents) and decreased the average patient ICU LOS by about one day.7 Although the study could not establish a causal relationship between the use of the goals form and a decrease in ICU LOS, the authors attributed the benefit to clarifying tasks, care plans and communication plans among caregivers. In the Keystone ICU project, clinicians in 108 adult ICUs in Michigan adopted evidence-based procedures to Critical Connections decrease catheter-related bloodstream infections, including use of a checklist to ensure protocol adherence. The observed 66% reduction in the incidence of catheterrelated bloodstream infection is well-known to ICU clinicians. It is easily overlooked, though, that in addition to the study procedures, the ICUs also implemented the use of daily goals sheets to improve clinician communication, and implemented a unit-based safety program to improve safety culture, which may also have positively impacted the study results.8 The benefit of checklists has also been demonstrated in pediatric ICUs. In one study, implementation of a rounding checklist in a pediatric ICU was associated with fewer accidental extubations.9 Many institutions have adopted checklists for patient care with positive results, but ensuring compliance with checklist completion may be challenging and overuse of checklists should be avoided.10 Interestingly, although interventions to improve teamwork and perceptions of caregiver teamwork have been associated with reductions in intermediate endpoints (i.e., patient LOS), an association with patient mortality has not been consistently demonstrated. Additionally, ICUs with higher levels of teamwork do not reliably perform better when compared with ICUs with lower levels of teamwork.11 These inconsistent findings regarding the influence of teamwork on patient mortality are likely due to confounding or lack of adequate study power and should be addressed in future studies. Improvements in the quality of teamwork have been associated with a broad variety of positive patient outcomes, and efforts to improve teamwork within an ICU should be investigated and implemented as much as possible. While improved team interactions have been associated with positive patient outcomes, poor team interactions have been associated with ICU adverse events. In an observational single-center study, communication events between nurses and physicians comprised only 2% of observed activities in the ICU, but were associated with 37% of www.sccm.org errors.12 A similar finding was observed in a multicenter study where poor teamwork contributed to 32% of patient safety incidents.13 About half of all ICU adverse events are adverse drug events (ADEs).14 Patients experiencing two or more ADEs have a threefold increase in the risk of ICU death15 and half of all ADEs occur at the prescription stage.16 Medication errors may be prevented by the inclusion of a pharmacist as an ICU team member. In one study from the United States where pharmacists were present at the time of medication prescription (either during patient care rounds or for consultation in the ICU), a 66% reduction in the number of preventable ADEs was observed.17 Similarly, in a Dutch study, ICU hospital pharmacist review of admission orders was associated with a 75% reduction in preventable ADEs.18 Furthermore, the presence of clinical pharmacists in ICUs has been associated with a shorter time to liberation from mechanical ventilation,19 lower mortality rates, and shorter ICU LOS in patients with infections.20 In conclusion, the complexity of the care of critically ill patients requires a coordinated team effort. Practitioners in the ICU should seek opportunities to improve teamwork in their own institutions. Team efforts such as multidisciplinary patient care rounds and a checklist with patient care goals may improve patient outcomes and avoid adverse events. References and disclosures are available at www.sccm.org/criticalconnections. Seth Bauer, PharmD, FCCM, is a medical ICU clinical specialist and member of the Medical ICU Quality Committee at the Cleveland Clinic. February/March 2015 | 7