Feasibility of a quality improvement project to increase adherence to evidence-based pulmonary embolism diagnosis in the emergency department.


Journal

Pilot and feasibility studies
ISSN: 2055-5784
Titre abrégé: Pilot Feasibility Stud
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101676536

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
04 Jan 2021
Historique:
received: 16 07 2020
accepted: 03 12 2020
entrez: 4 1 2021
pubmed: 5 1 2021
medline: 5 1 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Many evidence-based clinical decision tools are available for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (PE). However, these clinical decision tools have had suboptimal uptake in the everyday clinical practice in emergency departments (EDs), despite numerous implementation efforts. We aimed to test the feasibility of a multi-faceted intervention to implement an evidence-based PE diagnosis protocol. We conducted an interrupted time series study in three EDs in Ontario, Canada. We enrolled consecutive adult patients accessing the ED with suspected PE from January 1, 2018, to February 28, 2020. Components of the intervention were as follows: clinical leadership endorsement, a new pathway for PE testing, physician education, personalized confidential physician feedback, and collection of patient outcome information. The intervention was implemented in November 2019. We identified six criteria for defining the feasibility outcome: successful implementation of the intervention in at least two of the three sites, capturing data on ≥ 80% of all CTPAs ordered in the EDs, timely access to electronic data, rapid manual data extraction with feedback preparation before the end of the month ≥ 80% of the time, and time required for manual data extraction and feedback preparation ≤ 2 days per week in total. The intervention was successfully implemented in two out of three sites. A total of 5094 and 899 patients were tested for PE in the period before and after the intervention, respectively. We captured data from 90% of CTPAs ordered in the EDs, and we accessed the required electronic data. The manual data extraction and individual emergency physician audit and feedback were consistently finalized before the end of each month. The time required for manual data extraction and feedback preparation was ≤ 2 days per week (14 h). We proved the feasibility of implementing an evidence-based PE diagnosis protocol in two EDs. We were not successful implementing the protocol in the third ED. The study was not registered.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Many evidence-based clinical decision tools are available for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (PE). However, these clinical decision tools have had suboptimal uptake in the everyday clinical practice in emergency departments (EDs), despite numerous implementation efforts. We aimed to test the feasibility of a multi-faceted intervention to implement an evidence-based PE diagnosis protocol.
METHODS METHODS
We conducted an interrupted time series study in three EDs in Ontario, Canada. We enrolled consecutive adult patients accessing the ED with suspected PE from January 1, 2018, to February 28, 2020. Components of the intervention were as follows: clinical leadership endorsement, a new pathway for PE testing, physician education, personalized confidential physician feedback, and collection of patient outcome information. The intervention was implemented in November 2019. We identified six criteria for defining the feasibility outcome: successful implementation of the intervention in at least two of the three sites, capturing data on ≥ 80% of all CTPAs ordered in the EDs, timely access to electronic data, rapid manual data extraction with feedback preparation before the end of the month ≥ 80% of the time, and time required for manual data extraction and feedback preparation ≤ 2 days per week in total.
RESULTS RESULTS
The intervention was successfully implemented in two out of three sites. A total of 5094 and 899 patients were tested for PE in the period before and after the intervention, respectively. We captured data from 90% of CTPAs ordered in the EDs, and we accessed the required electronic data. The manual data extraction and individual emergency physician audit and feedback were consistently finalized before the end of each month. The time required for manual data extraction and feedback preparation was ≤ 2 days per week (14 h).
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
We proved the feasibility of implementing an evidence-based PE diagnosis protocol in two EDs. We were not successful implementing the protocol in the third ED.
REGISTRATION BACKGROUND
The study was not registered.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33390190
doi: 10.1186/s40814-020-00741-8
pii: 10.1186/s40814-020-00741-8
pmc: PMC7779326
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

4

Références

Can Assoc Radiol J. 2014 May;65(2):96-105
pubmed: 24559602
Eur Heart J. 2014 Nov 14;35(43):3033-69, 3069a-3069k
pubmed: 25173341
JAMA. 2014 Mar 19;311(11):1117-24
pubmed: 24643601
J Hosp Med. 2018 Jan;13(1):52-61
pubmed: 29309438
N Engl J Med. 2007 Nov 29;357(22):2277-84
pubmed: 18046031
Intensive Care Med. 2012 Aug;38(8):1345-51
pubmed: 22584801
CJEM. 2018 May;20(3):453-460
pubmed: 29429430
N Engl J Med. 2019 Nov 28;381(22):2125-2134
pubmed: 31774957
Am J Med. 2013 Nov;126(11):975-81
pubmed: 24157288
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jun 13;(6):CD000259
pubmed: 22696318
Lancet. 2017 Jul 15;390(10091):289-297
pubmed: 28549662
Emerg Radiol. 2015 Jun;22(3):221-9
pubmed: 25209190
Ann Intern Med. 2011 Oct 4;155(7):448-60
pubmed: 21969343
CJEM. 2008 Mar;10(2):151-73
pubmed: 18371253
Acad Emerg Med. 2012 Nov;19(11):1219-26
pubmed: 23167851
Lancet. 2004 Jan 31;363(9406):345-51
pubmed: 15070562
Acad Med. 2020 Aug;95(8):1230-1237
pubmed: 31789846
Med Care. 2009 Mar;47(3):356-63
pubmed: 19194332
J Am Coll Radiol. 2015 Oct;12(10):1023-9
pubmed: 26435116

Auteurs

Federico Germini (F)

Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Health Information Research Unit (HIRU), Communication Research Laboratory (CRL), McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada. germinif@mcmaster.ca.
Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. germinif@mcmaster.ca.

Yang Hu (Y)

Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Sarah Afzal (S)

Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Fayad Al-Haimus (F)

Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Srikanth A Puttagunta (SA)

Department of Radiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Saghar Niaz (S)

Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Teresa Chan (T)

Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Natasha Clayton (N)

Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Shawn Mondoux (S)

Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Department of Emergency Medicine, St Joseph's Healthcare, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Lehana Thabane (L)

Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Health Information Research Unit (HIRU), Communication Research Laboratory (CRL), McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada.
Population Health Research Institute, Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Biostatistics Unit, Father Sean O'Sullivan Research Centre, St Joseph's Healthcare, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Departments of Paediatrics and Anaesthesia, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Centre for Evaluation of Medicine, St Joseph's Healthcare, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Kerstin de Wit (K)

Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Health Information Research Unit (HIRU), Communication Research Laboratory (CRL), McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada.
Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Classifications MeSH