Format

Send to

Choose Destination
BMJ Open. 2019 Mar 15;9(3):e024159. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024159.

Barriers and facilitators to adopting high value practices and de-adopting low value practices in Canadian intensive care units: a multimethod study.

Author information

1
Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
2
Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
3
Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To compare and contrast illustrative examples of the adoption of high value practices and the de-adoption of low value practices.

DESIGN:

(1) Retrospective, population-based audit of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis (high value practice) and albumin for fluid resuscitation (low value practice) and (2) cross-sectional survey of healthcare providers.

SETTING:

Data were collected from nine adult medical-surgical intensive care units (ICUs) in two large Canadian cities. Patients are managed in these ICUs by a group of multiprofessional and multidisciplinary healthcare providers.

PARTICIPANTS:

Participants included 6946 ICU admissions and 309 healthcare providers from the same ICUs.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:

(1) The use of LMWH for VTE prophylaxis (per cent ICU days) and albumin for fluid resuscitation (per cent of patients); and (2) provider knowledge of evidence underpinning these practices, and barriers and facilitators to adopt and de-adopt these practices.

RESULTS:

LMWH was administered on 38.7% of ICU days, and 20.0% of patients received albumin.Most participants had knowledge of evidence underpinning VTE prophylaxis and fluid resuscitation (59.1% and 84.2%, respectively). Providers perceived these practices to be followed. The most commonly reported barrier to adoption was insufficient knowledge/understanding (32.8%), and to de-adoption was clinical leader preferences (33.2%). On-site education was the most commonly identified facilitator for adoption and de-adoption (67.8% and 68.6%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS:

Despite knowledge of and self-reported adherence to best practices, the audit demonstrated opportunity to improve. Provider-reported barriers and facilitators to adoption and de-adoption are broadly similar.

KEYWORDS:

appropriateness; healthcare system; intensive care; quality improvement; under-use and over-use

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for HighWire Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center