Debriefing after resuscitations in a pediatric emergency department

Multiple guidelines recommend debriefing of actual resuscitations to improve clinical performance. We implemented a novel standardized debriefing program using a Debriefing In Situ Conversation after Emergent Resuscitations Now (DISCERN) tool. Following the development of the evidence-based DISCERN tool, we conducted an observational study of all resuscitations (intubation, CPR, and/or defibrillation) at a pediatric emergency department (ED) over one year. Resuscitation interventions, patient survival, and physician team leader characteristics were analyzed as predictors for debriefing. Each debriefing's participants, time duration, and content were recorded. Thematic content of debriefings was categorized by framework approach into Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM) elements. There were 241 resuscitations and 63 (26%) debriefings. A higher proportion of debriefings occurred after CPR (p<0.001) or ED death (p<0.001). Debriefing participants always included an attending and nurse; the median number of staff roles present was six. Median interval (from resuscitation end to start of debriefing) & debriefing durations were 33 (IQR 15,67) and 10 minutes (IQR 5,12), respectively. Common TEAM themes included co-operation/coordination (30%), communication (22%), and situational awareness (15%). Stated reasons for not debriefing included: unnecessary (78%), time constraints (19%), or other reasons (3%). Debriefings with the DISCERN tool usually involved higher acuity resuscitations, involved most of the indicated personnel, and lasted less than 10 minutes. This qualitative tool could be adapted to other settings. Future studies are needed to evaluate for potential impacts on education, quality improvement programming, and staff emotional well-being.^

The prevention of catheter related bloodstream infections in a pediatric population

Catheter related bloodstream infections are a significant barrier to success in many inpatient healthcare facilities. The goal of this study was to analyze and determine if an evidence based methodology to reduce the number of catheter related bloodstream infections in a pediatric inpatient healthcare facility had significant impact on the infection rate. Catheter related bloodstream infection rates were compared before and after program implementation. The patient population was selected based upon a recommendation in the 2010 National Healthcare Safety Network report on device related infections. This report indicated a need for more data on pediatric populations requiring admission to a long term care facility. The study design is a retrospective cohort study. Catheter related bloodstream infection data was gathered between 2008 and 2011. In October of 2008 a program implementation began to reduce the number of catheter related bloodstream infections. The key components of this initiative were to implement a standardized catheter maintenance checklist, introduce the usage of a chlorhexadine gluconate based product for catheter maintenance and skin antisepsis, and a multidisciplinary education plan that focused on hand hygiene and aseptic technique. The catheter related bloodstream infection rate in 2008 was 21.21 infections per 1000 patient-line days. After program implementation the 2009 catheter related bloodstream infection rate dropped to 1.11 per 1000 patient-line days. The infection rates in 2010 and 2011 were 2.19 and 1.47 respectively. Additionally, this study demonstrated that there was a potential cost savings of $620,000 to $1,240,000 between 2008 and 2009. In conclusion, an evidence based program based upon CDC guidelines can have a significant impact on catheter related bloodstream infection rates. ^

Attitudes and other barriers to the utilization of clinical research findings by American physicians: A systematic review

Background: The Institute of Medicine estimates that only a maximum of 25% of clinical research findings are incorporated into practice by physicians. To improve clinical practice, efforts have been made to promote evidence-based medicine and the use of clinical guidelines. Despite these efforts, the gap between research and clinical practice remains wide.^ Objective: To systematically review the literature describing the factors which influence the use of clinical research recommendations by American physicians.^ Hypothesis: Barriers exist in the application of clinical research into clinical practice, and are multifactorial. The establishment of the Clinical and Translational Awards (CTSA; special federal grants awarded to selected institutions to support clinical and translational research) has reduced the effect of these barriers and improved the process of clinical research translation into practice among American physicians.^ Aims: Identify barriers and facilitators of the use of research findings in clinical practice by American physicians. Contrast studies published six years before and after the creation of the CTSA.^ Methods: The sources of data include published literature from Medline, PubMed and PsycINFO. Selected studies must be qualitative, a survey of American clinicians, based on evidence-based medicine practice, clinical guidelines or treatment pathways. Systematic reviews and reports were excluded, as well as studies with less than 100 respondents.^ Results: In total, 1036 abstracts were reviewed; 115 full text potential articles were identified and reviewed, and a total of 31 studies met all criteria for inclusion in the final review.^ Conclusions: The barriers against the application of clinical research findings, in the forms of clinical guidelines, evidence-based medicine guides and clinical pathways, can be divided broadly into physician barriers, practice/system barriers and patient barriers. Physician barriers are the most common barriers, especially the lack of familiarity with guidelines and the lack of time. Of the factors which improve the use of research based guidelines, physician factors such as younger age, lower duration of clinical practice, specialty training, and practice in large group Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) settings with fewer patients seen were the most commonly cited.^