Improving the implementation of perioperative safety guidelines using a multifaceted intervention approach: protocol of the IMPROVE study, a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial

Abstract

BackgroundThis study is initiated to evaluate the effects, costs, and feasibility at the hospital and patient level of an evidence-based strategy to improve the use of Dutch perioperative safety guidelines. Based on current knowledge, expert opinions and expertise of the project team, a multifaceted implementation strategy has been developed.Methods/designThis is a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial including nine representative hospitals across The Netherlands. Hospitals are stratified into three groups according to hospital type and geographical location and randomized in terms of the period for receipt of the intervention. All adult surgical patients meeting the inclusion criteria are assessed for patient outcomes. The implementation strategy includes education, audit and feedback, organizational interventions (e.g., local embedding of the guidelines), team-directed interventions (e.g., multi-professional team training), reminders, as well as patient-mediated interventions (e.g., patient safety cards). To tailor the implementation activities, we developed a questionnaire to identify barriers for effective guideline adherence, based on (a) a theoretical framework for classifying barriers and facilitators, (b) an instrument for measuring determinants of innovations, and (c) 19 semi-structured interviews with perioperative key professionals. Primary outcome is guideline adherence measured at the hospital (i.e., cluster) and patient levels by a set of perioperative Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs), which was developed parallel to the perioperative guidelines. Secondary outcomes at the patient level are in-hospital complications, postoperative wound infections and mortality, length of hospital stay, and unscheduled transfer to the intensive care unit, non-elective readmission to the hospital and unplanned reoperation, all within 30 days after the initial surgery. Also, patient safety culture and team climate will be studied as potential determinants. Finally, a process evaluation is conducted to identify the compliance with the implementation strategy, as well as an economic evaluation to assess the costs. Data sources are registered clinical data and surveys. There is no form of blinding.DiscussionThe perioperative setting is an unexplored area with respect to implementation issues. This study is expected to yield important new evidence about the effects of a multifaceted approach on guideline adherence in the perioperative care setting.Trial registrationDutch trial registry: NTR3568Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-014-0198-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of clinical practice guidelines in sonography

“…A systematic review of the literature by Hakkennes and Dodd suggested that simply adding more implementation strategies does not improve the uptake of a guideline. Additionally, many other studies have reported that combined strategies are only more effective than a single intervention if they address the barriers related to professional performance …”

Effect of Audit and Feedback on Physician Adherence to Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pneumonia and Sepsis

“…The study team estimated that the intracluster correlation (ICC) would be 0.1 based on previous studies that have reported ICC for interventions to improve guideline adherence among physicians. [29][30][31] Given the fixed number of attending physicians employed at the study setting, the team planned 6 clusters in order to best balance study groups. Using these assumptions, the team estimated the design effect to be 2.63, resulting in a total required sample size of 915 to detect a 15% increase in adherence to clinical practice guidelines.…”

Standards for Reporting Implementation Studies (StaRI): explanation and elaboration document

“…The implementation strategy and the intervention, however, may need to be adapted if they are to fit within the routines of local practice 86. Adaptation is the degree to which the strategy and intervention are modified by users during implementation to suit local needs 26. Insufficient fidelity to the ‘active ingredients’ of an intervention dilutes effectiveness,87 whereas insufficient adaptation stifles tailoring potentially diluting effective implementation 88.…”