Cargando…

Mapping structure, process and outcomes in the removal of low-value care practices in Canadian intensive care units: protocol for a mixed-methods exploratory study

INTRODUCTION: The challenge of implementing best evidence into clinical practice is a major problem in modern healthcare that can result in ineffective, inefficient and unsafe care. There is a growing body of literature which suggests that the removal or reduction of low-value care practices (ie, de...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Parsons Leigh, Jeanna, Petersen, Jennie, de Grood, Chloe, Whalen-Browne, Liam, Niven, Daniel, Stelfox, Henry Thomas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6937030/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31848173
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033333
_version_ 1783483807612010496
author Parsons Leigh, Jeanna
Petersen, Jennie
de Grood, Chloe
Whalen-Browne, Liam
Niven, Daniel
Stelfox, Henry Thomas
author_facet Parsons Leigh, Jeanna
Petersen, Jennie
de Grood, Chloe
Whalen-Browne, Liam
Niven, Daniel
Stelfox, Henry Thomas
author_sort Parsons Leigh, Jeanna
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The challenge of implementing best evidence into clinical practice is a major problem in modern healthcare that can result in ineffective, inefficient and unsafe care. There is a growing body of literature which suggests that the removal or reduction of low-value care practices (ie, deadoption) is integral to the delivery of high-quality care and the sustainability of our healthcare system. However, currently very little is known about deadoption practices in Canada. We propose to map the current state of deadoption in Canadian intensive care units (ICUs). A key deliverable of this work will include development of an inventory of barriers, facilitators and potential implementation strategies for guiding the deadoption efforts. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use Canadian adult general systems ICUs as our laboratory of investigation and employ a two-phased sequential exploratory mixed-methods approach: (1) semi-structured interviews with critical care stakeholders to develop an understanding of the structure (ie, healthcare context), process (ie, actions and events in healthcare) and outcomes (ie, effects on health status, quality, knowledge or behaviour) of deadoption (phase I) and (2) surveys with a broader sample of critical care stakeholders to further identify important barriers and facilitators, as well as potential implementation strategies (phase II). Interview data will be analysed through qualitative content analysis and survey data will be analysed through quantitative analyses to identify top barriers and facilitators, as well as top rated strategies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained through the University of Calgary Research Ethics Board (REB 17–2153). Participants involved will have the opportunity to provide feedback on the final written reports to support accurate representation of the data. The findings of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and oral presentations with critical care stakeholders across Canada. Patient and family partners will receive an executive summary of the findings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6937030
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69370302020-01-06 Mapping structure, process and outcomes in the removal of low-value care practices in Canadian intensive care units: protocol for a mixed-methods exploratory study Parsons Leigh, Jeanna Petersen, Jennie de Grood, Chloe Whalen-Browne, Liam Niven, Daniel Stelfox, Henry Thomas BMJ Open Intensive Care INTRODUCTION: The challenge of implementing best evidence into clinical practice is a major problem in modern healthcare that can result in ineffective, inefficient and unsafe care. There is a growing body of literature which suggests that the removal or reduction of low-value care practices (ie, deadoption) is integral to the delivery of high-quality care and the sustainability of our healthcare system. However, currently very little is known about deadoption practices in Canada. We propose to map the current state of deadoption in Canadian intensive care units (ICUs). A key deliverable of this work will include development of an inventory of barriers, facilitators and potential implementation strategies for guiding the deadoption efforts. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use Canadian adult general systems ICUs as our laboratory of investigation and employ a two-phased sequential exploratory mixed-methods approach: (1) semi-structured interviews with critical care stakeholders to develop an understanding of the structure (ie, healthcare context), process (ie, actions and events in healthcare) and outcomes (ie, effects on health status, quality, knowledge or behaviour) of deadoption (phase I) and (2) surveys with a broader sample of critical care stakeholders to further identify important barriers and facilitators, as well as potential implementation strategies (phase II). Interview data will be analysed through qualitative content analysis and survey data will be analysed through quantitative analyses to identify top barriers and facilitators, as well as top rated strategies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained through the University of Calgary Research Ethics Board (REB 17–2153). Participants involved will have the opportunity to provide feedback on the final written reports to support accurate representation of the data. The findings of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and oral presentations with critical care stakeholders across Canada. Patient and family partners will receive an executive summary of the findings. BMJ Publishing Group 2019-12-16 /pmc/articles/PMC6937030/ /pubmed/31848173 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033333 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Intensive Care
Parsons Leigh, Jeanna
Petersen, Jennie
de Grood, Chloe
Whalen-Browne, Liam
Niven, Daniel
Stelfox, Henry Thomas
Mapping structure, process and outcomes in the removal of low-value care practices in Canadian intensive care units: protocol for a mixed-methods exploratory study
title Mapping structure, process and outcomes in the removal of low-value care practices in Canadian intensive care units: protocol for a mixed-methods exploratory study
title_full Mapping structure, process and outcomes in the removal of low-value care practices in Canadian intensive care units: protocol for a mixed-methods exploratory study
title_fullStr Mapping structure, process and outcomes in the removal of low-value care practices in Canadian intensive care units: protocol for a mixed-methods exploratory study
title_full_unstemmed Mapping structure, process and outcomes in the removal of low-value care practices in Canadian intensive care units: protocol for a mixed-methods exploratory study
title_short Mapping structure, process and outcomes in the removal of low-value care practices in Canadian intensive care units: protocol for a mixed-methods exploratory study
title_sort mapping structure, process and outcomes in the removal of low-value care practices in canadian intensive care units: protocol for a mixed-methods exploratory study
topic Intensive Care
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6937030/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31848173
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033333
work_keys_str_mv AT parsonsleighjeanna mappingstructureprocessandoutcomesintheremovaloflowvaluecarepracticesincanadianintensivecareunitsprotocolforamixedmethodsexploratorystudy
AT petersenjennie mappingstructureprocessandoutcomesintheremovaloflowvaluecarepracticesincanadianintensivecareunitsprotocolforamixedmethodsexploratorystudy
AT degroodchloe mappingstructureprocessandoutcomesintheremovaloflowvaluecarepracticesincanadianintensivecareunitsprotocolforamixedmethodsexploratorystudy
AT whalenbrowneliam mappingstructureprocessandoutcomesintheremovaloflowvaluecarepracticesincanadianintensivecareunitsprotocolforamixedmethodsexploratorystudy
AT nivendaniel mappingstructureprocessandoutcomesintheremovaloflowvaluecarepracticesincanadianintensivecareunitsprotocolforamixedmethodsexploratorystudy
AT stelfoxhenrythomas mappingstructureprocessandoutcomesintheremovaloflowvaluecarepracticesincanadianintensivecareunitsprotocolforamixedmethodsexploratorystudy