Cargando…

Implementation of a central-line bundle: a qualitative study of three clinical units

BACKGROUND: Evidence for the central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) bundle effectiveness remains mixed, possibly reflecting implementation challenges and persistent ambiguities in how CLABSIs are counted and bundle adherence measured. In the context of a tertiary pediatric hospital t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Goldman, Joanne, Rotteau, Leahora, Shojania, Kaveh G., Baker, G. Ross, Rowland, Paula, Christianson, Marlys K., Vogus, Timothy J., Cameron, Connie, Coffey, Maitreya
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8447632/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34530918
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43058-021-00204-y
_version_ 1784569058363965440
author Goldman, Joanne
Rotteau, Leahora
Shojania, Kaveh G.
Baker, G. Ross
Rowland, Paula
Christianson, Marlys K.
Vogus, Timothy J.
Cameron, Connie
Coffey, Maitreya
author_facet Goldman, Joanne
Rotteau, Leahora
Shojania, Kaveh G.
Baker, G. Ross
Rowland, Paula
Christianson, Marlys K.
Vogus, Timothy J.
Cameron, Connie
Coffey, Maitreya
author_sort Goldman, Joanne
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Evidence for the central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) bundle effectiveness remains mixed, possibly reflecting implementation challenges and persistent ambiguities in how CLABSIs are counted and bundle adherence measured. In the context of a tertiary pediatric hospital that had reduced CLABSI by 30% as part of an international safety program, we aimed to examine unit-based socio-cultural factors influencing bundle practices and measurement, and how they come to be recognized and attended to by safety leaders over time in an organization-wide bundle implementation effort. METHODS: We used an interpretivist qualitative research approach, based on 74 interviews, approximately 50 h of observations, and documents. Data collection focused on hospital executives and safety leadership, and three clinical units: a medical specialty unit, an intensive care unit, and a surgical unit. We used thematic analysis and constant comparison methods for data analysis. RESULTS: Participants had variable beliefs about the central-line bundle as a quality improvement priority based on their professional roles and experiences and unit setting, which influenced their responses. Nursing leaders were particularly concerned about CLABSI being one of an overwhelming number of QI targets for which they were responsible. Bundle implementation strategies were initially reliant on unit-based nurse education. Over time there was recognition of the need for centralized education and reinforcement tactics. However, these interventions achieved limited impact given the influence of competing unit workflow demands and professional roles, interactions, and routines, which were variably targeted in the safety program. The auditing process, initially a responsibility of units, was performed in different ways based on individuals’ approaches to the process. Given concerns about auditing reliability, a centralized approach was implemented, which continued to have its own variability. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings report on a contextualized, dynamic implementation approach that required movement between centralized and unit-based approaches and from a focus on standardization to some recognition of a role for customization. However, some factors related to bundle compliance and measurement remain unaddressed, including harder to change socio-cultural factors likely important to sustainability of the CLABSI reductions and fostering further improvements across a broader safety agenda.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8447632
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84476322021-09-20 Implementation of a central-line bundle: a qualitative study of three clinical units Goldman, Joanne Rotteau, Leahora Shojania, Kaveh G. Baker, G. Ross Rowland, Paula Christianson, Marlys K. Vogus, Timothy J. Cameron, Connie Coffey, Maitreya Implement Sci Commun Research BACKGROUND: Evidence for the central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) bundle effectiveness remains mixed, possibly reflecting implementation challenges and persistent ambiguities in how CLABSIs are counted and bundle adherence measured. In the context of a tertiary pediatric hospital that had reduced CLABSI by 30% as part of an international safety program, we aimed to examine unit-based socio-cultural factors influencing bundle practices and measurement, and how they come to be recognized and attended to by safety leaders over time in an organization-wide bundle implementation effort. METHODS: We used an interpretivist qualitative research approach, based on 74 interviews, approximately 50 h of observations, and documents. Data collection focused on hospital executives and safety leadership, and three clinical units: a medical specialty unit, an intensive care unit, and a surgical unit. We used thematic analysis and constant comparison methods for data analysis. RESULTS: Participants had variable beliefs about the central-line bundle as a quality improvement priority based on their professional roles and experiences and unit setting, which influenced their responses. Nursing leaders were particularly concerned about CLABSI being one of an overwhelming number of QI targets for which they were responsible. Bundle implementation strategies were initially reliant on unit-based nurse education. Over time there was recognition of the need for centralized education and reinforcement tactics. However, these interventions achieved limited impact given the influence of competing unit workflow demands and professional roles, interactions, and routines, which were variably targeted in the safety program. The auditing process, initially a responsibility of units, was performed in different ways based on individuals’ approaches to the process. Given concerns about auditing reliability, a centralized approach was implemented, which continued to have its own variability. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings report on a contextualized, dynamic implementation approach that required movement between centralized and unit-based approaches and from a focus on standardization to some recognition of a role for customization. However, some factors related to bundle compliance and measurement remain unaddressed, including harder to change socio-cultural factors likely important to sustainability of the CLABSI reductions and fostering further improvements across a broader safety agenda. BioMed Central 2021-09-16 /pmc/articles/PMC8447632/ /pubmed/34530918 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43058-021-00204-y Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Goldman, Joanne
Rotteau, Leahora
Shojania, Kaveh G.
Baker, G. Ross
Rowland, Paula
Christianson, Marlys K.
Vogus, Timothy J.
Cameron, Connie
Coffey, Maitreya
Implementation of a central-line bundle: a qualitative study of three clinical units
title Implementation of a central-line bundle: a qualitative study of three clinical units
title_full Implementation of a central-line bundle: a qualitative study of three clinical units
title_fullStr Implementation of a central-line bundle: a qualitative study of three clinical units
title_full_unstemmed Implementation of a central-line bundle: a qualitative study of three clinical units
title_short Implementation of a central-line bundle: a qualitative study of three clinical units
title_sort implementation of a central-line bundle: a qualitative study of three clinical units
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8447632/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34530918
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43058-021-00204-y
work_keys_str_mv AT goldmanjoanne implementationofacentrallinebundleaqualitativestudyofthreeclinicalunits
AT rotteauleahora implementationofacentrallinebundleaqualitativestudyofthreeclinicalunits
AT shojaniakavehg implementationofacentrallinebundleaqualitativestudyofthreeclinicalunits
AT bakergross implementationofacentrallinebundleaqualitativestudyofthreeclinicalunits
AT rowlandpaula implementationofacentrallinebundleaqualitativestudyofthreeclinicalunits
AT christiansonmarlysk implementationofacentrallinebundleaqualitativestudyofthreeclinicalunits
AT vogustimothyj implementationofacentrallinebundleaqualitativestudyofthreeclinicalunits
AT cameronconnie implementationofacentrallinebundleaqualitativestudyofthreeclinicalunits
AT coffeymaitreya implementationofacentrallinebundleaqualitativestudyofthreeclinicalunits