A Process Improvement Project to Increase Compliance With Cephalosporin-based Surgical Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in Children With Non-severe Penicillin Allergies

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Cephalosporins are considered safe and first-line prophylaxis in children with non-severe penicillin allergies. However, use of second-line agents is common and is primarily driven by poor allergic response documentation and misunderstanding of cross-reactivity risk. The goal of this project was to improve compliance with cephalosporin prophylaxis through improved documentation and targeted educational efforts.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary working group including representatives from allergy, surgery, infectious disease, and pharmacy developed staged interventions to facilitate compliance with cephalosporin prophylaxis. These included: (1) caregiver outreach to clarify incomplete allergy documentation, (2) a decision-support algorithm for prophylaxis use in penicillin-allergic patients, (3) standardized educational resources for surgical faculty and rotating trainees, (4) email reminders with prophylaxis recommendations sent out prior to scheduled cases, and (5) EMR-based decision support during antibiotic ordering. Rates of complete allergy documentation and cephalosporin utilization were compared for general surgery procedures between a 12-month pre-intervention and 14-month post-intervention period.

RESULTS

578 patients with penicillin allergies recorded in the EMR were included (301 pre-intervention and 277 post-intervention), 54.0% of which received prophylaxis. Compared to the pre-intervention period, complete documentation of allergic reactions increased from 57.1% to 84.2% (p < 0.001) following implementation of all interventions. Appropriate prophylaxis utilization increased from 34.5% to 88.5% following implementation of all interventions (p < 0.001), and evidence of a stepwise increase in appropriate utilization was evident with each intervention stage. Persistent compliance failures during the post-implementation period were most commonly associated with urgent and emergent add-on cases. No adverse events or allergic responses were reported before or after project implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

Compliance with cephalosporin prophylaxis significantly improved following a multidisciplinary effort targeting education, allergy documentation, and clinical support at the point of care. Ongoing efforts include postoperative audits within 24 h for noncompliant cases in order to identify barriers and improve compliance for urgent and emergent add-on cases.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

TYPE OF STUDY

Prospective.

Do learners implement what they learn? Commitment-to-change following an interprofessional palliative care course

BACKGROUND

Palliative care educators should incorporate strategies that enhance application into practice by learners. Commitment-to-change is an approach to reinforce learning and encourage application into practice; immediately post-course learners commit to making changes in their practices as a result of participating in the course ("statements") and then several weeks or months later are prompted to reflect on their commitments ("reflections").

AIM

Explore if and how learners implemented into practice what they learned in a palliative care course, using commitment-to-change reflections.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of post-course commitment statements and 4-months post-course commitment reflections submitted online by learners who participated in Pallium Canada's interprofessional, 2-day, Learning Essential Approaches to Palliative Care (LEAP) Core courses.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Primary care providers from across Canada and different profession who attended LEAP Core courses from 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2017.

RESULTS

About 1063 of 4636 learners (22.9%) who participated in the 244 courses delivered during the study period submitted a total of 4250 reflections 4 months post-course. Of these commitments, 3081 (72.5%) were implemented. The most common implemented commitments related to initiating palliative care early across diseases, pain and symptom management, use of clinical instruments, advance care planning, and interprofessional collaboration. Impact extended to patients, services, and colleagues. Barriers to implementation into practice included lack of time, and system-level factors such as lack of support by managers and untrained colleagues.

CONCLUSIONS

Examples of benefits to patients, families, services, colleagues, and themselves were described as a result of participating in the courses.