Using protocols in ICU practice. Engaging the staff.

Aims/Purpose: Protocols are evidenced-based structured guides for directing care to achieve improvements. But translating that evidence into practice is a major challenge. It is not acceptable to simply introduce the protocol and expect it to be adopted and lead to change in practice. Implementation requires effective leadership and management. This presentation describes a strategy for implementation that should promote successful adoption and lead to practice change.
Presentation description: There are many social and behavioural change models to assist and guide practice change. Choosing a model to guide implementation is important for providing a framework for action. The change process requires careful thought, from the protocol itself to the policies and politics within the ICU. In this presentation, I discuss a useful pragmatic guide called the 6SQUID (6 Steps in QUality Intervention Development). This was initially designed for public health interventions, but the model has wider applicability and has similarities with other change process models. Steps requiring consideration include examining the purpose and the need for change; the staff that will be affected and the impact on their workload; and the evidence base supporting the protocol. Subsequent steps in the process that the ICU manager should consider are the change mechanism (widespread multi-disciplinary consultation; adapting the protocol to the local ICU); and identifying how to deliver the change mechanism (educational workshops and preparing staff for the changes are imperative). Recognising the barriers to implementation and change and addressing these locally is also important. Once the protocol has been implemented, there is generally a learning curve before it becomes embedded in practice. Audit and feedback on adherence are useful strategies to monitor and sustain the changes.
Conclusion: Managing change successfully will promote a positive experience for staff. In turn, this will encourage a culture of enthusiasm for translating evidence into practice.

Withdrawal of Antidementia Drugs in Older People: Who, When and How?

The evidence base to guide withdrawal of antidementia medications in older people with dementia is limited; while some randomised controlled studies have considered discontinuation of cholinesterase inhibitors, no such studies examining discontinuation of the N-Methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist memantine have been conducted to date. The purpose of this opinion article was to summarise the existing evidence on withdrawal of cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine, to highlight the key considerations for clinicians when making these prescribing decisions and to offer guidance as to when and how treatment might be discontinued. Until the evidence-base is enhanced by the findings of large scale randomised controlled discontinuation trials of ChEIs and memantine which use multiple, clinically relevant cognitive, functional and behavioural outcome measures, clinicians’ prescribing decisions involve balancing the risks of discontinuation with side-effects and costs of continued treatment. Such decisions must be highly individualised and patient-centred.

Music therapy for palliative care: A realist review

Music therapy has experienced a rising demand as an adjunct therapy for symptom management among palliative care patients. We conducted a realist review of the literature to develop a greater understanding of how music therapy might benefit palliative care patients and the contextual mechanisms that promote or inhibit its successful implementation.
We searched electronic databases (CINAHL, Embase, Medline, and PsychINFO) for literature containing information on music therapy for palliative care. In keeping with the realist approach, we examined all relevant literature to develop theories that could explain how music therapy works.
A total of 51 articles were included in the review. Music therapy was found to have a therapeutic effect on the physical, psychological, emotional, and spiritual suffering of palliative care patients. We also identified program mechanisms that help explain music therapy's therapeutic effects, along with facilitating contexts for implementation.
Music therapy may be an effective nonpharmacological approach to managing distressing symptoms in palliative care patients. The findings also suggest that group music therapy may be a cost-efficient and effective way to support staff caring for palliative care patients. We encourage others to continue developing the evidence base in order to expand our understanding of how music therapy works, with the aim of informing and improving the provision of music therapy for palliative care patients.

Sepsis: the LightCycler SeptiFast Test MGRADE®, SepsiTest™ and IRIDICA BAC BSI assay for rapidly identifying bloodstream bacteria and fungi – a systematic review and economic evaluation

Background: Sepsis can lead to multiple organ failure and death. Timely and appropriate treatment can reduce in-hospital mortality and morbidity. Objectives: To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of three tests [LightCycler SeptiFast Test MGRADE® (Roche Diagnostics, Risch-Rotkreuz, Switzerland); SepsiTest™ (Molzym Molecular Diagnostics, Bremen, Germany); and the IRIDICA BAC BSI assay (Abbott Diagnostics, Lake Forest, IL, USA)] for the rapid identification of bloodstream bacteria and fungi in patients with suspected sepsis compared with standard practice (blood culture with or without matrix-absorbed laser desorption/ionisation time-offlight mass spectrometry). Data sources: Thirteen electronic databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library) were searched from January 2006 to May 2015 and supplemented by hand-searching relevant articles. Review methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness studies were conducted. A review of published economic analyses was undertaken and a de novo health economic model was constructed. A decision tree was used to estimate the costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) associated with each test; all other parameters were estimated from published sources. The model was populated with evidence from the systematic review or individual studies, if this was considered more appropriate (base case 1). In a secondary analysis, estimates (based on experience and opinion) from seven clinicians regarding the benefits of earlier test results were sought (base case 2). A NHS and Personal Social Services perspective was taken, and costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5% per annum. Scenario analyses were used to assess uncertainty. Results: For the review of diagnostic test accuracy, 62 studies of varying methodological quality were included. A meta-analysis of 54 studies comparing SeptiFast with blood culture found that SeptiFast had an estimated summary specificity of 0.86 [95% credible interval (CrI) 0.84 to 0.89] and sensitivity of 0.65 (95% CrI 0.60 to 0.71). Four studies comparing SepsiTest with blood culture found that SepsiTest had an estimated summary specificity of 0.86 (95% CrI 0.78 to 0.92) and sensitivity of 0.48 (95% CrI 0.21 to 0.74), and four studies comparing IRIDICA with blood culture found that IRIDICA had an estimated summary specificity of 0.84 (95% CrI 0.71 to 0.92) and sensitivity of 0.81 (95% CrI 0.69 to 0.90). Owing to the deficiencies in study quality for all interventions, diagnostic accuracy data should be treated with caution. No randomised clinical trial evidence was identified that indicated that any of the tests significantly improved key patient outcomes, such as mortality or duration in an intensive care unit or hospital. Base case 1 estimated that none of the three tests provided a benefit to patients compared with standard practice and thus all tests were dominated. In contrast, in base case 2 it was estimated that all cost per QALY-gained values were below £20,000; the IRIDICA BAC BSI assay had the highest estimated incremental net benefit, but results from base case 2 should be treated with caution as these are not evidence based. Limitations: Robust data to accurately assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the interventions are currently unavailable. Conclusions: The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the interventions cannot be reliably determined with the current evidence base. Appropriate studies, which allow information from the tests to be implemented in clinical practice, are required.