Cargando…

Project RedDE: Cluster Randomized Trial to Reduce Missed or Delayed Abnormal Laboratory Value Actions

Failure of timely abnormal laboratory result follow-up is relatively common and may lead to harm. This study hypothesized that a quality improvement collaborative (QIC) could reduce the frequency of missed or delayed action on abnormal laboratory values. METHODS: A national cohort of pediatric pract...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rinke, Michael L., Bundy, David G., Lehmann, Christoph U., Heo, Moonseong, Adelman, Jason S., Norton, Amanda, Singh, Hardeep
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6805103/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31745521
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/pq9.0000000000000218
_version_ 1783461316279664640
author Rinke, Michael L.
Bundy, David G.
Lehmann, Christoph U.
Heo, Moonseong
Adelman, Jason S.
Norton, Amanda
Singh, Hardeep
author_facet Rinke, Michael L.
Bundy, David G.
Lehmann, Christoph U.
Heo, Moonseong
Adelman, Jason S.
Norton, Amanda
Singh, Hardeep
author_sort Rinke, Michael L.
collection PubMed
description Failure of timely abnormal laboratory result follow-up is relatively common and may lead to harm. This study hypothesized that a quality improvement collaborative (QIC) could reduce the frequency of missed or delayed action on abnormal laboratory values. METHODS: A national cohort of pediatric practices was cluster-randomized to sequentially receive a QIC intervention: video conferences, transparent data sharing, a “focus on failures,” QI coaching, and tools to help reduce missed or delayed action on abnormal laboratory values. Practices recorded the percentage of patients with 5 specific abnormal laboratory values who received an appropriate provider action (control), and then, during an 8-month intervention phase, implemented QI strategies to reduce errors (intervention). Subsequently, practices collected data on laboratory errors while working to reduce unrelated second (sustain phase), and third (maintenance phase) errors. Generalized mixed-effects regression models compared the mean percentage of patients with appropriate actions. RESULTS: We randomized 43 practices, of which 31 were included in analyses. Control and intervention phases included 1,357 and 1,426 patients with abnormal laboratory values, respectively. The mean percentage of patients who received appropriate actions did not change comparing control and intervention phases [risk difference (RD) 1%; 95% CI −1%, 3%]. In post-hoc analyses, practices significantly improved comparing control to sustain (RD 3%; 95% CI 0.3%, 6%) and maintenance phases (RD 6%; 95% CI 3%, 9%). CONCLUSION: Implementation of a QIC did not reduce the frequency of abnormal laboratory errors in the initial 8-month intervention phase. A significant reduction was appreciated comparing sustain and maintenance phases (months 9–24) to the control phase.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6805103
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68051032019-11-19 Project RedDE: Cluster Randomized Trial to Reduce Missed or Delayed Abnormal Laboratory Value Actions Rinke, Michael L. Bundy, David G. Lehmann, Christoph U. Heo, Moonseong Adelman, Jason S. Norton, Amanda Singh, Hardeep Pediatr Qual Saf Multi-institutional collaborative and QI network research Failure of timely abnormal laboratory result follow-up is relatively common and may lead to harm. This study hypothesized that a quality improvement collaborative (QIC) could reduce the frequency of missed or delayed action on abnormal laboratory values. METHODS: A national cohort of pediatric practices was cluster-randomized to sequentially receive a QIC intervention: video conferences, transparent data sharing, a “focus on failures,” QI coaching, and tools to help reduce missed or delayed action on abnormal laboratory values. Practices recorded the percentage of patients with 5 specific abnormal laboratory values who received an appropriate provider action (control), and then, during an 8-month intervention phase, implemented QI strategies to reduce errors (intervention). Subsequently, practices collected data on laboratory errors while working to reduce unrelated second (sustain phase), and third (maintenance phase) errors. Generalized mixed-effects regression models compared the mean percentage of patients with appropriate actions. RESULTS: We randomized 43 practices, of which 31 were included in analyses. Control and intervention phases included 1,357 and 1,426 patients with abnormal laboratory values, respectively. The mean percentage of patients who received appropriate actions did not change comparing control and intervention phases [risk difference (RD) 1%; 95% CI −1%, 3%]. In post-hoc analyses, practices significantly improved comparing control to sustain (RD 3%; 95% CI 0.3%, 6%) and maintenance phases (RD 6%; 95% CI 3%, 9%). CONCLUSION: Implementation of a QIC did not reduce the frequency of abnormal laboratory errors in the initial 8-month intervention phase. A significant reduction was appreciated comparing sustain and maintenance phases (months 9–24) to the control phase. Wolters Kluwer Health 2019-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC6805103/ /pubmed/31745521 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/pq9.0000000000000218 Text en Copyright © 2019 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Multi-institutional collaborative and QI network research
Rinke, Michael L.
Bundy, David G.
Lehmann, Christoph U.
Heo, Moonseong
Adelman, Jason S.
Norton, Amanda
Singh, Hardeep
Project RedDE: Cluster Randomized Trial to Reduce Missed or Delayed Abnormal Laboratory Value Actions
title Project RedDE: Cluster Randomized Trial to Reduce Missed or Delayed Abnormal Laboratory Value Actions
title_full Project RedDE: Cluster Randomized Trial to Reduce Missed or Delayed Abnormal Laboratory Value Actions
title_fullStr Project RedDE: Cluster Randomized Trial to Reduce Missed or Delayed Abnormal Laboratory Value Actions
title_full_unstemmed Project RedDE: Cluster Randomized Trial to Reduce Missed or Delayed Abnormal Laboratory Value Actions
title_short Project RedDE: Cluster Randomized Trial to Reduce Missed or Delayed Abnormal Laboratory Value Actions
title_sort project redde: cluster randomized trial to reduce missed or delayed abnormal laboratory value actions
topic Multi-institutional collaborative and QI network research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6805103/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31745521
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/pq9.0000000000000218
work_keys_str_mv AT rinkemichaell projectreddeclusterrandomizedtrialtoreducemissedordelayedabnormallaboratoryvalueactions
AT bundydavidg projectreddeclusterrandomizedtrialtoreducemissedordelayedabnormallaboratoryvalueactions
AT lehmannchristophu projectreddeclusterrandomizedtrialtoreducemissedordelayedabnormallaboratoryvalueactions
AT heomoonseong projectreddeclusterrandomizedtrialtoreducemissedordelayedabnormallaboratoryvalueactions
AT adelmanjasons projectreddeclusterrandomizedtrialtoreducemissedordelayedabnormallaboratoryvalueactions
AT nortonamanda projectreddeclusterrandomizedtrialtoreducemissedordelayedabnormallaboratoryvalueactions
AT singhhardeep projectreddeclusterrandomizedtrialtoreducemissedordelayedabnormallaboratoryvalueactions