Objective
The Awakening and Breathing Coordination, Delirium monitoring/management and Early exercise/mobility (ABCDE) bundle is an evidence-based, interprofessional, multicomponent strategy for minimizing sedative exposure, reducing duration of mechanical ventilation and managing intensive care unit (ICU) acquired delirium and weakness. The purpose of this study was to identify facilitators and barriers to ABCDE bundle adoption and to evaluate the extent to which bundle implementation was effective, sustainable, and conducive to dissemination.

Implementing the awakening and breathing coordination, delirium monitoring/management, and early exercise/mobility bundle into everyday care: opportunities, challenges, and lessons learned for implementing the ICU Pain, Agitation, and Delirium Guidelines.

Recognizing the importance of teamwork in hospitals, senior leadership from the American College of Physician Executives (ACPE), the American Hospital Association (AHA), the American Organization of Nurse Executives (AONE), and the Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) established the High Performance Teams and the Hospital of the Future project. This collaborative learning effort aims to redesign care delivery to provide optimal value to hospitalized patients. With input from members of this initiative, we prepared this report which reviews the literature related to teamwork in hospitals. Teamwork is critically important to provide safe and effective hospital care. Hospitals with high teamwork ratings experience higher patient satisfaction, higher nurse retention, and lower hospital costs. Elements of effective teamwork have been defined and provide a framework for assessment and improvement efforts in hospitals. Measurement of teamwork is essential to understand baseline performance, and to demonstrate the utility of resources invested to enhance it and the subsequent impact on patient care. Interventions designed to improve teamwork in hospitals include localization of physicians, daily goals of care forms and checklists, teamwork training, and interdisciplinary rounds. Though additional research is needed to evaluate the impact on patient outcomes, these interventions consistently result in improved teamwork knowledge, ratings of teamwork climate, and better understanding of patients' plans of care. The optimal approach is implementation of a combination of interventions, with adaptations to fit unique clinical settings and local culture.

/pdf/interdisciplinary-teamwork-in-hospitals-a-review-and-1hmmhmjqsh.pdf

Interdisciplinary teamwork in hospitals: a review and practical recommendations for improvement.

Comprehensive care of ICU survivors: Development and implementation of an ICU recovery center

Importance Improving the quality of health care for general medical patients is a priority, but the organization of general medical ward care receives less scrutiny than the management of specific diseases. Optimizing teams’ performance improves patient outcomes in other settings, and interdisciplinary practice is a major target for improvement efforts. However, the effect of interdisciplinary team interventions on general medical ward care has not been systematically reviewed. Objectives To describe the range of objective patient outcomes used in studies of general medical ward interdisciplinary team care, and to evaluate the performance of interdisciplinary interventions against them. Evidence Review We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO from January 1, 1998, through December 31, 2013, for interdisciplinary team care interventions in adult general medical wards using an objective patient outcome measure. Reference lists of included articles were also searched. The last search was conducted on January 29, 2014, and the narrative and statistical analysis was conducted through December 1, 2014. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care group’s tool. Findings Thirty of 6934 articles met the selection criteria. The studies included 66 548 patients, with a mean age of 63 years. Nineteen of 30 (63%) studies reported length of stay, readmission, or mortality rate as their primary outcome, or did not specify the primacy of their outcomes. The most commonly reported objective patient outcomes were length of stay (23 of 30 [77%]), complications of care (10 of 30 [33%]), in-hospital mortality rate (8 of 30 [27%]), and 30-day readmission rate (8 of 30 [27%]). Of 23 interventions, 16 (70%) had no effect on length of stay, 12 of 15 (80%) did not reduce readmissions, and 14 of 15 (93%) did not affect mortality. Five of 10 (50%) interventions reduced complications of care. In an exploratory quantitative analysis, the interventions did not consistently reduce the relative risk of early readmission or early mortality, or the weighted mean difference in length of stay. All studies had a medium or high risk of bias. Conclusions and Relevance Current evidence suggests that interdisciplinary team care interventions on general medical wards have little effect on traditional measures of health care quality. Complications of care or preventable adverse events may merit inclusion as quality indicators for general medical wards. Future study should clarify how best to implement interdisciplinary team care interventions and establish quality metrics that are credible to both health care professionals and patients in this setting.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/articlepdf/2301377/ioi150048.pdf

Effects of Interdisciplinary Team Care Interventions on General Medical Wards: A Systematic Review

Traditional hospital wards are not specifically designed as effective clinical microsystems. The feasibility and sustainability of doing so are unclear, as are the possible outcomes. To reorganize a traditional hospital ward with the traits of an effective clinical microsystem, we designed it to have 4 specific features: (1) unit-based teams, (2) structured interdisciplinary bedside rounds, (3) unit-level performance reporting, and (4) unit-level nurse and physician coleadership. We called this type of unit an accountable care unit (ACU). In this narrative article, we describe our experience implementing each feature of the ACU. Our aim was to introduce a progressive approach to hospital care and training.

/pdf/reorganizing-a-hospital-ward-as-an-accountable-care-unit-2fldxov2pc.pdf

Reorganizing a hospital ward as an accountable care unit

Background Effective collaboration and teamwork is essential to providing safe hospital care. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of an intervention designed to improve interdisciplinary collaboration and lower the rate of adverse events (AEs). Methods The study was a controlled trial of an intervention, Structured Inter-Disciplinary Rounds, implemented in 1 of 2 similar medical teaching units in a tertiary care academic hospital. The intervention combined a structured format for communication with a forum for regular interdisciplinary meetings. We conducted a retrospective medical record review evaluating 370 randomly selected patients admitted to the intervention and control units (n = 185 each) in the 24 weeks after and 185 admitted to the intervention unit in the 24 weeks before the implementation of Structured Inter-Disciplinary Rounds (N = 555). Medical records were screened for AEs. Two hospitalists confirmed the presence of AEs and assessed their preventability and severity in a masked fashion. We used multivariable Poisson regression models to compare the adjusted incidence of AEs in the intervention unit to that in concurrent and historic control units. Results The rate of AEs was 3.9 per 100 patient-days for the intervention unit compared with 7.2 and 7.7 per 100 patient-days, respectively, for the concurrent and historic control units (adjusted rate ratio, 0.54; P  = .005; and 0.51; P  = .001). The rate of preventable AEs was 0.9 per 100 patient-days for the intervention unit compared with 2.8 and 2.1 per 100 patient-days for the concurrent and historic control units (adjusted rate ratio, 0.27; P  = .002; and 0.37; P  = .02). The low number of AEs rated as serious or life-threatening precluded statistical analysis for differences in rates of events classified as serious or serious and preventable. Conclusion Structured Inter-Disciplinary Rounds significantly reduced the adjusted rate of AEs in a medical teaching unit.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/articlepdf/227060/ioi05173_678_684.pdf

Structured Interdisciplinary Rounds in a Medical Teaching Unit: Improving Patient Safety

BACKGROUND
Effective collaboration and teamwork is essential to providing safe hospital care. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of an intervention designed to improve interdisciplinary collaboration and lower the rate of adverse events (AEs).


METHODS
The study was a controlled trial of an intervention, Structured Inter-Disciplinary Rounds, implemented in 1 of 2 similar medical teaching units in a tertiary care academic hospital. The intervention combined a structured format for communication with a forum for regular interdisciplinary meetings. We conducted a retrospective medical record review evaluating 370 randomly selected patients admitted to the intervention and control units (n = 185 each) in the 24 weeks after and 185 admitted to the intervention unit in the 24 weeks before the implementation of Structured Inter-Disciplinary Rounds (N = 555). Medical records were screened for AEs. Two hospitalists confirmed the presence of AEs and assessed their preventability and severity in a masked fashion. We used multivariable Poisson regression models to compare the adjusted incidence of AEs in the intervention unit to that in concurrent and historic control units.


RESULTS
The rate of AEs was 3.9 per 100 patient-days for the intervention unit compared with 7.2 and 7.7 per 100 patient-days, respectively, for the concurrent and historic control units (adjusted rate ratio, 0.54; P = .005; and 0.51; P = .001). The rate of preventable AEs was 0.9 per 100 patient-days for the intervention unit compared with 2.8 and 2.1 per 100 patient-days for the concurrent and historic control units (adjusted rate ratio, 0.27; P = .002; and 0.37; P = .02). The low number of AEs rated as serious or life-threatening precluded statistical analysis for differences in rates of events classified as serious or serious and preventable.


CONCLUSION
Structured Inter-Disciplinary Rounds significantly reduced the adjusted rate of AEs in a medical teaching unit.

Helene M. Fligiel

Papers

Structured Interdisciplinary Rounds in a Medical Teaching Unit: Improving Patient Safety

Structured Interdisciplinary Rounds in a Medical Teaching Unit