No abstract

BackgroundTimely lab results are important to clinical decision-making and hospital flow. However, at our institution, unreliable blood sample collection for patients with central venous access jeopardised this outcome and created staff dissatisfaction.MethodsA multidisciplinary team of nurses including a specialist clinical nurse leader (CNL), the hospital intravenous team and quality improvement (QI) consultants aimed to achieve >80% blood sample collection reliability among patients with central venous access by employing a simple signature/countersignature form coupled with audit-feedback and behavioural economics strategies. The form was piloted on one 25-bed unit. Data were collected for 60 weeks and interpreted per standard run chart rules.ResultsBlood sample collection reliability exceeded the 80% goal by week 22. The practice was sustained on the pilot unit and spread successfully to other wards despite significant operational threats including the COVID-19 pandemic.ConclusionsAt our institution, a simple signature/countersignature form supplemented by audit-feedback and behavioural economics strategies led to sustained practice change among staff. The pairing of CNL to QI consultant enhanced change potency and durability.

BackgroundMedication adherence impacts health outcomes. Healthcare organisations implementing system-level interventions have potential for greater spread and sustainability than individual-level interventions. Within the integrated US Veterans Health Administration, a multidisciplinary team developed and evaluated a pilot quality improvement programme to assess the feasibility of automatic mailed prescription refills for patients with diabetes and low medication adherence (assessed by medication possession ratio <80%).MethodsPatients were randomised to usual care with self-initiated refills versus automatic mailed refills for 6 months. Process outcomes included glycaemic control measures (HgbA1C), medication possession ratios for both automatic and self-initiated (reference) refills of medications, patient satisfaction and workforce effort (pharmacist time).ResultsOverall, 199 patients were randomised to automatic refills (n=99; 40 of whom participated) versus usual care (n=100). In multivariable analysis adjusting for baseline differences, after 6 months there was no difference in the proportion of patients with follow-up HgbA1C <8% (60.8% automatic refills vs 60.5% usual care, p=0.96). In the automatic refill group, the medication possession ratio for reference medicines was significantly higher than usual care (63.9% vs 54.5%, 95% CI (for difference) 3.1% to 15.9%, p<0.01).ConclusionsImplications and lessons from this pilot programme include potential beneficial indirect effects from automatic medication refills on patient self-initiated refills of other medications; the importance of tailoring solutions to patient subgroups and specific adherence barriers; and recognition that the rapid deployment, iteration and evaluation of the project was facilitated by a multidisciplinary team embedded within an organisational learning health system.