3 results
MP32: Using physician practice reports and feedback sessions to reduce low value care in bronchiolitis
- S. Dowling, I. Gjata, N. Solbak, C. Weaver, K. Smart, R. Buna, A. Stang
-
- Journal:
- Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine / Volume 22 / Issue S1 / May 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 13 May 2020, p. S54
- Print publication:
- May 2020
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Background: Despite strong evidence recommending supportive care as the mainstay of management for most infants with bronchiolitis, prior studies suggest that many of these patients receive low-value interventions. Providing clinicians with their practice reports and peer comparator data or an achievable benchmark of care (audit and feedback) has been shown to be an effective strategy to improve adherence to guidelines. Aim Statement: To decrease low-value care (use of any or all of chest radiographs, viral testing and salbutamol) in infants with bronchiolitis by delivering individual physician reports in addition to Group Facilitated Feedback Sessions (GFFS) to pediatric emergency physicians (PEPs). Measures & Design: Our cohort included 3,883 patients ≤12 months old that presented to two emergency departments with a diagnosis of bronchiolitis from April 1, 2013 to April 30, 2018. Using administrative data we captured baseline characteristics and interventions. Consenting PEPs received two audit and feedback (A&F) reports which included their individual and peer comparator data. Two multi-disciplinary GFFS (including inpatient pediatricians, nurse, learners and respiratory therapists) presented data and identified barriers and enablers of reducing low-value care. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who received any low-value intervention, and was analyzed using statistical process control charts. Process measures (consent to obtain report, attendance and evaluations from the feedback session) and balancing measures were also captured. Evaluation/Results: 78% of PEPs consented to receive their A&F reports. Patient baseline characteristics were similar in the baseline (n = 3109) and intervention period (n = 774). Following the baseline physician reports and the GFFS, low-value care decreased from 42.6% to 27.1% (absolute difference: -15.5%; 95% confidence interval (CI): -19.8% to -11.2%) and 78.9% to 64.4% (absolute difference: -14.5%; 95% CI: -21.9% to -7.2%) in patients who were not admitted and admitted, respectively. Balancing measures such as ICU admission (absolute difference: -0.6%; 95%CI: -5.7% to 4.4%) and ED revisit within 72 hours (absolute difference: -0.1%; 95% CI: -3.1% to 3.0% non-admitted patients, 1.0%; 95% CI: -1.2% to 3.2% admitted patients) were unchanged. Discussion/Impact: The combination of audit and feedback and a GFFS significantly reduced low-value care for pediatric patients with bronchiolitis by PEP's.
LO88: Bronchiolitis management in Calgary emergency departments
- S. K. Dowling, A. Stang, I. Gjata, S. Law, K. Burak, R. Buna, D. Duncan, K. Smart
-
- Journal:
- Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine / Volume 20 / Issue S1 / May 2018
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 11 May 2018, p. S38
- Print publication:
- May 2018
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Introduction: Bronchiolitis is a viral respiratory infection and the most common reason for hospitalization of infants. Despite evidence that few interventions are beneficial in patients with bronchiolitis, other studies would have shown that a significant proportion of patients undergo various forms of low value care. This objective of this project was to 1. establish baseline management of bronchiolitis in the Calgary Zone, and 2. deliver audit and feedback (A&F) reports to pediatric emergency physicians (PEP) to identify opportunities and strategies for practice improvement. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included all patients 12 months old that presented to a Calgary emergency department or urgent care center with a diagnosis of bronchiolitis from April 1, 2013 to March 31, 2017. Using data from various electronic health data sources, we captured age, vital signs, CTAS, common therapeutic interventions (bronchodilators, steroids, antibiotics) and investigations (chest x-ray (CXR), viral studies, antibiotics). Results were stratified by site and by admission status. Descriptive statistics were used to report baseline characteristics and interventions. Interhospital ranges (IHR) were provided to compare different hospitals in the zone. For the A&F component of the project, consenting PEP received a report of both their individual and peer comparator data and an in-person multi-disciplinary facilitated feedback session. Results: We included 4023 patients from all 6 sites (range from 28 to 3316 patients). Admission rates were 21.7% (IHR 0-29%). Mean age was 5.4 months old. Bronchodilator use was 27.0% (IHR 21-41%). 22.0% of patients received a CXR (IHR 0-57%) and 30.3% had viral studies done (IHR range 0.8-33%). PEP had higher usage of viral studies (30% vs 5.7%), whereas non-PEP had higher CXR usage (46.2% vs 23.4%). 41 of 66 PEP consented to receive their individual A&F reports (62%). In the facilitated feedback session PEP 1. identified two areas (bronchodilators and viral studies) where improvements could be made and 2. discussed specific strategies to decrease practice variation and minimize low value care including development of a multi-disciplinary care pathway, alignment with in-patient management, education and repeated A&F reports. Conclusion: Significant variability exists in management of patients with bronchiolitis across different hospitals in our zone. A facilitated feedback session identified areas for improvement and multi-disciplinary strategies to reduced low value care for patients with bronchiolitis. Future phases of this project include repeated data in 6 months and implementation of a provincial care pathway for the management of bronchiolitis.
P145: The role of audit and feedback in the ED setting: are physicians able to accurately predict their own practice?
- A. Stang, S. Law, I. Gjata, K. Burak, S. Dowling
-
- Journal:
- Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine / Volume 20 / Issue S1 / May 2018
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 11 May 2018, pp. S108-S109
- Print publication:
- May 2018
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Introduction: Prior research has shown that audit and feedback (A &F) can be an effective tool for practice change. However, questions remain about how to optimize A&F. The objectives of this project were to determine if: 1) there are differences in practice between physicians who do, and do not, consent to receive a confidential report on their practice and; 2) if there is a relationship between consenting physicians self-predicted and actual practice. Methods: This was a prospective, cross-sectional study embedded in a larger quality improvement (QI) initiative to align physician practice with best evidence in the emergency department (ED) care of infants with bronchiolitis. All physicians practicing in the ED of a tertiary care pediatric hospital were offered the opportunity to consent to receive an individual, confidential data report on their practice. Prior to receiving their data, consenting physicians completed a survey which asked them to predict the proportion of bronchiolitic patients for whom they ordered diagnostic tests or treatments. We used chi-squared testing to compare the proportion of consenting and non-consenting physicians whose diagnostic test (Chest X-ray (CXR), viral study) and treatment (steroid, Ventolin) ordering was above the median for all ED physicians. We used Pearsons correlation to assess the relationship between consenting physicians self -predicted and actual practice. Results: 56% (37/66) of physicians consented to receive a data report. The median proportion of patients with an x-ray ordered was 20%, 63% of non-consenters were above the median, compared to 36% of consenters (X2 (1, N=66)=4.91 p=0.03). For viral testing, 31% of patients had a test ordered, with 50% of non-consenters and 50% consenters above the median (( X2 (1, N=66) =0 p=1); 11% of patients had steroids ordered, with 53% of non-consenters and 47% of consenters above the median ( X2 (1, N=66)=0.24 p-0.621); and 18% of patients had Ventolin ordered, with 60% of non-consenters and 42% of consenters above the median ( X2 (1, N=66) =2.2 p=0.138). There was a moderate correlation between physicians predicted and actual practice with respect to viral testing (r=0.67), but minimal correlation for CXR (0.05), steroids (r=0.17) or Ventolin (r=0.33) ordering. Conclusion: The finding that physicians have a limited ability to accurately predict their own performance emphasizes the importance of providing physicians with feedback. However, our results suggest that the consent process may be a potential barrier to effective A &F.