Cost-effectiveness of a central venous catheter care bundle

Background: A bundled approach to central venous catheter care is currently being promoted as an effective way of preventing catheter-related bloodstream infection (CR-BSI). Consumables used in the bundled approach are relatively inexpensive which may lead to the conclusion that the bundle is cost-effective. However, this fails to consider the nontrivial costs of the monitoring and education activities required to implement the bundle, or that alternative strategies are available to prevent CR-BSI. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a bundle to prevent CR-BSI in Australian intensive care patients. ---------- Methods and Findings: A Markov decision model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the bundle relative to remaining with current practice (a non-bundled approach to catheter care and uncoated catheters), or use of antimicrobial catheters. We assumed the bundle reduced relative risk of CR-BSI to 0.34. Given uncertainty about the cost of the bundle, threshold analyses were used to determine the maximum cost at which the bundle remained cost-effective relative to the other approaches to infection control. Sensitivity analyses explored how this threshold alters under different assumptions about the economic value placed on bed-days and health benefits gained by preventing infection. If clinicians are prepared to use antimicrobial catheters, the bundle is cost-effective if national 18-month implementation costs are below $1.1 million. If antimicrobial catheters are not an option the bundle must cost less than $4.3 million. If decision makers are only interested in obtaining cash-savings for the unit, and place no economic value on either the bed-days or the health benefits gained through preventing infection, these cost thresholds are reduced by two-thirds.---------- Conclusions: A catheter care bundle has the potential to be cost-effective in the Australian intensive care setting. Rather than anticipating cash-savings from this intervention, decision makers must be prepared to invest resources in infection control to see efficiency improvements.

Reducing pressure injuries in critically ill patients by using a patient skin integrity care bundle (InSPiRE)

Purpose To test an interventional patient skin integrity bundle, InSPiRE protocol, on the impact of pressure injuries (PrIs) in critically ill patients in an Australian adult intensive care unit (ICU). Methods Before and after design was used where the group of patients receiving the intervention (InSPiRE protocol) was compared with a similar control group who received standard care. Data collected included demographic and clinical variables, skin assessment, PrI presence and stage, and a Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score. Results Overall, 207 patients were enrolled, 105 in the intervention group and 102 in the control group. Most patients were men, mean age 55. The groups were similar on major demographic variables (age, SOFA scores, ICU length of stay). Pressure injury cumulative incidence was significantly lower in the intervention group (18%) compared to the control group for skin injuries(30.4%) (χ2=4.271, df=1, p=0.039) and mucous injuries (t test =3.27, p=<0.001) . Significantly fewer PrIs developing over time in the intervention group (Logrank= 11.842, df=1, p=<0.001) and patients developed fewer skin injuries (>3 PrIs/patient = 1/105) compared with the control group (>3 injuries/patient = 10/102) (p=0.018). Conclusion The intervention group, recieving the InSPiRE protocol, had lower PrI cumulative incidence, and reduced number and severity of PrIs that developed over time. Systematic and ongoing assessment of the patient's skin and PrI risk as well as implementation of tailored prevention measures are central to preventing PrIs.

Designing care bundle documentation to support the recognition and treatment of acute kidney injury: a route to quality improvement

The chapter describes development of care bundle documentation, through an iterative, user-centred design process, to support the recognition and treatment of acute kidney injury (AKI). The chapter details stages of user and stakeholder consultation, employed to develop a design response that was sensitive to user experience and need, culminating in simulation testing of a near final prototype. The development of supplementary awareness-raising materials, relating to the main care bundle tool is also discussed. This information design response to a complex clinical decision-making process is contrasted to other approaches to promoting AKI care. The need for different but related approaches to the working tool itself and the tool’s communication are discussed. More general recommendations are made for the development of communication tools to support complex clinical processes.

Initial emergency nursing management of patients with severe traumatic brain injury : development of an evidence-based care bundle for the Thai emergency department context.

Thai emergency nurses play a vital role in caring for patients with severe TBI, and are an important part of the healthcare team throughout the resuscitation phase. They are also responsible for continuous physiological monitoring, and detecting deterioration associated with increased intracranial pressure and preventing secondary brain injury. However, there is known variation in Thai nurses' knowledge and care practices for patients with severe TBI. In addition, there are no specific evidence-based practice guidelines available for emergency nursing management of patients with severe TBI.

INTroducing a care bundle to prevent pressure injury (INTACT) in at-risk patients: a protocol for a cluster randomised trial

BACKGROUND: Pressure injuries are a significant clinical and economic issue, affecting both patients and the health care system. Many pressure injuries in hospitals are facility acquired, and are largely preventable. Despite growing evidence and directives for pressure injury prevention, implementation of preventative strategies is suboptimal, and pressure injuries remain a serious problem in hospitals. OBJECTIVES: This study will test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a patient-centred pressure injury prevention care bundle on the development of hospital acquired pressure injury in at-risk patients. DESIGN: This is a multi-site, parallel group cluster randomised trial. The hospital is the unit of randomisation. METHODS: Adult medical and surgical patients admitted to the study wards of eight hospitals who are (a) deemed to be at risk of pressure injury (i.e. have reduced mobility), (b) expected to stay in hospital for ≥48h, (c) admitted to hospital in the past 36h; and (d) able to provide informed consent will be eligible to participate. Consenting patients will receive either the pressure injury prevention care bundle or standard care. The care bundle contains three main messages: (1) keep moving; (2) look after your skin; and (3) eat a healthy diet. Nurses will receive education about the intervention. Patients will exit the study upon development of a pressure injury, hospital discharge or 28 days, whichever comes first; transfer to another hospital or transfer to critical care and mechanically ventilated. The primary outcome is incidence of hospital acquired pressure injury. Secondary outcomes are pressure injury stage, patient participation in care and health care costs. A health economic sub-study and a process evaluation will be undertaken alongside the trial. Data will be analysed at the cluster (hospital) and patient level. Estimates of hospital acquired pressure injury incidence in each group, group differences and 95% confidence interval and p values will be reported. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first trial of an intervention to incorporate a number of pressure injury prevention strategies into a care bundle focusing on patient participation and nurse-patient partnership. The results of this study will provide important information on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this intervention in preventing pressure injuries in at-risk patients. If the results confirm the utility of the developed care bundle, it could have a significant impact on clinical practice worldwide. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12613001343796.

Nurses' perceptions of using an evidence-based care bundle for initial emergency nursing management of patients with severe traumatic brain injury: A qualitative study.

Evidence to guide initial emergency nursing care of patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) in Thailand is currently not available in a useable form. A care bundle was used to summarise an evidence-based approach to the initial emergency nursing management of patients with severe TBI and was implemented in one Thai emergency department. The aim of this study was to describe Thai emergency nurses' perceptions of care bundle use. A descriptive qualitative study was used to describe emergency nurses' perceptions of care bundle use during the implementation phase (Phase-One) and then post-implementation (Phase-Two). Ten emergency nurses participated in Phase-One, while 12 nurses participated in Phase-Two. In Phase-One, there were five important factors identified in relation to use of the care bundle including quality of care, competing priorities, inadequate equipment, agitated patients, and teamwork. In Phase Two, participants perceived that using the care bundle helped them to improve quality of care, increased nurses' knowledge, skills, and confidence. Care bundles are one strategy to increase integration of research evidence into clinical practice and facilitate healthcare providers to deliver optimal patient care in busy environments with limited resources.

Using an evidence-based care bundle to improve Thai emergency nurses' knowledge of care for patients with severe traumatic brain injury

There is known variation in Thai nurses' knowledge regarding the best available evidence for care of patients with severe traumatic brain injury. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of an evidence-based care bundle on Thai emergency nurses' knowledge regarding management of patients with severe traumatic brain injury. A pre-test/post-test design was used. The study intervention was an evidence-based care bundle for initial nursing management of patients with severe traumatic brain injury. Data were collected from 31 Registered Nurses using multiple choice questions. Results revealed a statistically significant improvement in overall knowledge scores after care bundle implementation (p < 0.001). There were statistically significant improvements in five areas of knowledge: understanding of target end-tidal carbon dioxide levels (p < 0.001), implications of hypocapnia in severe traumatic brain injury (p = 0.01), implications of hypercapnia in severe traumatic brain injury (p = 0.02), importance of maintaining head and neck in neutral position (p = 0.05), and administration of sedatives and analgesics in severe traumatic brain injury (p = 0.01). This study suggested that implementation of an evidence-based care bundle improved emergency nurses' knowledge regarding management of patients with severe traumatic brain injury.

Using an evidence-based care bundle to improve initial emergency nursing management of patients with severe traumatic brain injury

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To test the feasibility of an evidence-based care bundle in a Thai emergency department. The specific objective of this study was to examine the impact of the implementation of the care bundle on the initial emergency nursing management of patients with severe traumatic brain injury. BACKGROUND: A care bundle approach is one strategy used to improve the consistency, quality and safety of emergency care for different patients groups, however, has not been tested in patients with severe traumatic brain injury. DESIGN: A pretest/post-test design was used. The study intervention was an evidence-based care bundle for initial emergency nursing management of patients with severe traumatic brain injury. METHODS: Nonparticipant observations were conducted between October 2012-June 2013 at an emergency department of a 640 bed regional hospital in Southern Thailand. The initial emergency nursing care was observed in 45 patients with severe traumatic brain injury: 20 patients in the pretest period and 25 patients in the post-test period. RESULTS: There were significant improvements in clinical care of patients with severe traumatic brain injury after implementation of the care bundle: (1) use of end-tidal carbon dioxide monitoring, (2) frequency of respiratory rate assessment, (3) frequency of pulse rate and blood pressure assessment, and (4) patient positioning. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that implementation of an evidence-based care bundle improved specific elements of emergency nurses' clinical management of patients with severe traumatic brain injury. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The study suggests that a care bundle approach can be used as a strategy to improve emergency nursing care of patients with severe traumatic brain injury.

Use of an evidence-based care bundle by Thai emergency nurses.

 Implementation of a care bundle for nursing management of patients with severe traumatic brain injury was feasible in the Thai context. Use of an evidence-based care bundle increased emergency nurses’ knowledge regarding severe TBI management and improved the care delivered during the initial emergency nursing management of these patients.

Effectiveness of a care bundle to reduce central line-associated bloodstream infections

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of a care bundle, with a novel line maintenance procedure, in reducing the rate of central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) in the intensive care unit (ICU).

DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Before-and-after study using CLABSI data reported to the Victorian Healthcare Associated Infection Surveillance System (VICNISS), in adult patients admitted to a tertiary adult ICU in regional Victoria between 1 July 2006 and 30 June 2014. VICNISS-reported CLABSI cases were reviewed for verification. An intervention was implemented in 2009.

INTERVENTION: The care bundle introduced in 2009 included a previously established line insertion procedure and a novel line maintenance procedure comprising Biopatch, daily 2% chlorhexidine body wash, daily ICU central line review, and liaison nurse follow-up of central lines.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: CLABSI rate (cases per 1000 central line days). RESULTS: The average CLABSI rate fell from 2.2/1000 central line days (peak of 5.2/1000 central line days in quarter 4, 2008) during the pre-intervention period to 0.5/1000 central line days (0/1000 central line days from July 2012 to July 2014) during the post-intervention period.

CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that this care bundle, using a novel maintenance procedure, can effectively reduce the CLABSI rate and maintain it at zero out to 2 years.

Setting hospital infection control policy : a decision-making framework incorporating health economics and healthcare epidemiology

Background: Reducing rates of healthcare acquired infection has been identified by the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care as a national priority. One of the goals is the prevention of central venous catheter-related bloodstream infection (CR-BSI). At least 3,500 cases of CR-BSI occur annually in Australian hospitals, resulting in unnecessary deaths and costs to the healthcare system between $25.7 and $95.3 million. Two approaches to preventing these infections have been proposed: use of antimicrobial catheters (A-CVCs); or a catheter care and management ‘bundle’. Given finite healthcare budgets, decisions about the optimal infection control policy require consideration of the effectiveness and value for money of each approach. Objectives: The aim of this research is to use a rational economic framework to inform efficient infection control policy relating to the prevention of CR-BSI in the intensive care unit. It addresses three questions relating to decision-making in this area: 1. Is additional investment in activities aimed at preventing CR-BSI an efficient use of healthcare resources? 2. What is the optimal infection control strategy from amongst the two major approaches that have been proposed to prevent CR-BSI? 3. What uncertainty is there in this decision and can a research agenda to improve decision-making in this area be identified? Methods: A decision analytic model-based economic evaluation was undertaken to identify an efficient approach to preventing CR-BSI in Queensland Health intensive care units. A Markov model was developed in conjunction with a panel of clinical experts which described the epidemiology and prognosis of CR-BSI. The model was parameterised using data systematically identified from the published literature and extracted from routine databases. The quality of data used in the model and its validity to clinical experts and sensitivity to modelling assumptions was assessed. Two separate economic evaluations were conducted. The first evaluation compared all commercially available A-CVCs alongside uncoated catheters to identify which was cost-effective for routine use. The uncertainty in this decision was estimated along with the value of collecting further information to inform the decision. The second evaluation compared the use of A-CVCs to a catheter care bundle. We were unable to estimate the cost of the bundle because it is unclear what the full resource requirements are for its implementation, and what the value of these would be in an Australian context. As such we undertook a threshold analysis to identify the cost and effectiveness thresholds at which a hypothetical bundle would dominate the use of A-CVCs under various clinical scenarios. Results: In the first evaluation of A-CVCs, the findings from the baseline analysis, in which uncertainty is not considered, show that the use of any of the four A-CVCs will result in health gains accompanied by cost-savings. The MR catheters dominate the baseline analysis generating 1.64 QALYs and cost-savings of $130,289 per 1.000 catheters. With uncertainty, and based on current information, the MR catheters remain the optimal decision and return the highest average net monetary benefits ($948 per catheter) relative to all other catheter types. This conclusion was robust to all scenarios tested, however, the probability of error in this conclusion is high, 62% in the baseline scenario. Using a value of $40,000 per QALY, the expected value of perfect information associated with this decision is $7.3 million. An analysis of the expected value of perfect information for individual parameters suggests that it may be worthwhile for future research to focus on providing better estimates of the mortality attributable to CR-BSI and the effectiveness of both SPC and CH/SSD (int/ext) catheters. In the second evaluation of the catheter care bundle relative to A-CVCs, the results which do not consider uncertainty indicate that a bundle must achieve a relative risk of CR-BSI of at least 0.45 to be cost-effective relative to MR catheters. If the bundle can reduce rates of infection from 2.5% to effectively zero, it is cost-effective relative to MR catheters if national implementation costs are less than $2.6 million ($56,610 per ICU). If the bundle can achieve a relative risk of 0.34 (comparable to that reported in the literature) it is cost-effective, relative to MR catheters, if costs over an 18 month period are below $613,795 nationally ($13,343 per ICU). Once uncertainty in the decision is considered, the cost threshold for the bundle increases to $2.2 million. Therefore, if each of the 46 Level III ICUs could implement an 18 month catheter care bundle for less than $47,826 each, this approach would be cost effective relative to A-CVCs. However, the uncertainty is substantial and the probability of error in concluding that the bundle is the cost-effective approach at a cost of $2.2 million is 89%. Conclusions: This work highlights that infection control to prevent CR-BSI is an efficient use of healthcare resources in the Australian context. If there is no further investment in infection control, an opportunity cost is incurred, which is the potential for a more efficient healthcare system. Minocycline/rifampicin catheters are the optimal choice of antimicrobial catheter for routine use in Australian Level III ICUs, however, if a catheter care bundle implemented in Australia was as effective as those used in the large studies in the United States it would be preferred over the catheters if it was able to be implemented for less than $47,826 per Level III ICU. Uncertainty is very high in this decision and arises from multiple sources. There are likely greater costs to this uncertainty for A-CVCs, which may carry hidden costs, than there are for a catheter care bundle, which is more likely to provide indirect benefits to clinical practice and patient safety. Research into the mortality attributable to CR-BSI, the effectiveness of SPC and CH/SSD (int/ext) catheters and the cost and effectiveness of a catheter care bundle in Australia should be prioritised to reduce uncertainty in this decision. This thesis provides the economic evidence to inform one area of infection control, but there are many other infection control decisions for which information about the cost-effectiveness of competing interventions does not exist. This work highlights some of the challenges and benefits to generating and using economic evidence for infection control decision-making and provides support for commissioning more research into the cost-effectiveness of infection control.

A two-arm cluster randomized control trial to determine the effectiveness of a pressure ulcer prevention bundle for critically ill patients

Purpose This study tested the effectiveness of a pressure ulcer (PU) prevention bundle in reducing the incidence of PUs in critically ill patients in two Saudi intensive care units (ICUs). Design A two-arm cluster randomized experimental control trial. Methods Participants in the intervention group received the PU prevention bundle, while the control group received standard skin care as per the local ICU policies. Data collected included demographic variables (age, diagnosis, comorbidities, admission trajectory, length of stay) and clinical variables (Braden Scale score, severity of organ function score, mechanical ventilation, PU presence, and staging). All patients were followed every two days from admission through to discharge, death, or up to a maximum of 28 days. Data were analyzed with descriptive correlation statistics, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, and Poisson regression. Findings The total number of participants recruited was 140: 70 control participants (with a total of 728 days of observation) and 70 intervention participants (784 days of observation). PU cumulative incidence was significantly lower in the intervention group (7.14%) compared to the control group (32.86%). Poisson regression revealed the likelihood of PU development was 70% lower in the intervention group. The intervention group had significantly less Stage I (p = 002) and Stage II PU development (p = 026). Conclusions Significant improvements were observed in PU-related outcomes with the implementation of the PU prevention bundle in the ICU; PU incidence, severity, and total number of PUs per patient were reduced. Clinical Relevance Utilizing a bundle approach and standardized nursing language through skin assessment and translation of the knowledge to practice has the potential to impact positively on the quality of care and patient outcome.

Vancomycin-resistant enterococcus outbreak in a pediatric intensive care unit: report of successful interventions for control and prevention

The objective of this study is to retrospectively report the results of interventions for controlling a vancomycin-resistant enterococcus (VRE) outbreak in a tertiary-care pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) of a University Hospital. After identification of the outbreak, interventions were made at the following levels: patient care, microbiological surveillance, and medical and nursing staff training. Data were collected from computer-based databases and from the electronic prescription system. Vancomycin use progressively increased after March 2008, peaking in August 2009. Five cases of VRE infection were identified, with 3 deaths. After the interventions, we noted a significant reduction in vancomycin prescription and use (75% reduction), and the last case of VRE infection was identified 4 months later. The survivors remained colonized until hospital discharge. After interventions there was a transient increase in PICU length-of-stay and mortality. Since then, the use of vancomycin has remained relatively constant and strict, no other cases of VRE infection or colonization have been identified and length-of-stay and mortality returned to baseline. In conclusion, we showed that a bundle intervention aiming at a strict control of vancomycin use and full compliance with the Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee guidelines, along with contact precautions and hand-hygiene promotion, can be effective in reducing vancomycin use and the emergence and spread of vancomycin-resistant bacteria in a tertiary-care PICU.

Efforts of hospital system wound care teams to reduce hospital acquired pressure ulcers

New reimbursement policies developed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) are revolutionizing the health care landscape in America. The policies focus on clinical quality and patient outcomes. As part of the new policies, certain hospital acquired conditions have been identified by Medicare as "reasonably preventable". Beginning October 1, 2008, Medicare will no longer reimburse hospitals for these conditions developed after admission, pressure ulcers are among the most common of these conditions.^ In this practice-based culminating experience the objective was to provide a practical account of the process of program development, implementation and evaluation in a public health setting. In order to decrease the incidence of pressure ulcers, the program development team of the hospital system developed a comprehensive pressure ulcer prevention program using a "bundled" approach. The pressure ulcer prevention bundle was based on research supported by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement, and addressed key areas of clinical vulnerability for pressure ulcer development. The bundle consisted of clinical processes, policies, forms, and resources designed to proactively identify patients at risk for pressure ulcer development. Each element of the bundle was evaluated to ensure ease of integration into the workflow of nurses and clinical ancillary staff. Continued monitoring of pressure ulcer incidence rates will provide statistical validation of the impact of the prevention bundle. ^

The cost effective management of Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections (CLABSIs) comparing the central line bundle to antimicrobialcoated central venous catheters: A systematic review

Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections (CLABSIs) are one of the most costly and preventable cases of morbidity and mortality among intensive care units (ICUs) in health care today. In 2008, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Medicare Program, under the Deficit Reduction Act, announced it will no longer reimburse hospitals for such adverse events among those related to CLABSIs. This reveals the financial burden shift onto the hospital rather than the health care payer who can now withhold reimbursements. With this weighing more heavily on hospital management, decision makers will need to find a way to completely prevent cases of CLABSI or simply pay for the financial consequences. ^ To reduce the risk of CLABSIs, several clinical, preventive interventions have been studied and even instituted including the Central Line (CL) Bundle and Antimicrobial Coated Central Venous Catheters (AM-CVCs). I carried out a formal systematic review on the topic to compare the cost-effectiveness of the Central Line (CL) Bundle to the commercially available antimicrobial coated central venous catheters (AM-CVCs) in preventing CLABSIs among critically and chronically ill patients in the U.S. Evidence was assessed for inclusion against predefined criteria. I, myself, conducted the data extraction. Ten studies were included in the review. Efficacy in reducing the mean incidence rate of CLABSI by the CL Bundle and AM-CVC interventions were compared with one another including costs. ^ The AM-CVC impregnated with antibiotics, rifampin-minocycline (AI-RM) is more clinically effective than the CL Bundle in reducing the mean rate of CLABSI per 1,000 catheter days. The lowest mean incidence rate of CLABSI per 1,000 catheter days among the AM-CVC studies was as low as zero in favor of the AI-RM. Moreover, the review revealed that the AI-RM appears to be more cost-effective than the CL Bundle. Results showed the adjusted incremental cost of the CL Bundle per ICU patient requiring a CVC to be approximately $196 while the AI-RM at only an additional cost of $48 per ICU patient requiring a CVC. ^ Limited data regarding the cost of the CL Bundle made it difficult to make a true comparison to the direct cost of the AM-CVCs. However, using the result I did have from this review, I concluded that the AM-CVCs do appear to be more cost-effective in decreasing the mean rate of CLABSI while also minimizing incremental costs per CVC than the CL Bundle. This review calls for further research addressing the cost of the CL Bundle and compliance and more effective study designs such as randomized control trials comparing the efficacy and cost of the CL Bundle to the AM-CVCs. Barriers that may face health care managers when implementing the CL Bundle or AM-CVCs include additional costs associated with the intervention, educational training and ongoing reinforcement as well as creating a new culture of understanding.^