A method to audit and score implementation of knowledge translation (KT) interventions in large health regions - an observational pilot study using rectal cancer surgery in Ontario

Knowledge translation following the implementation of a state-wide Paediatric Sepsis Pathway in the emergency department- a multi-centre survey study

Background

Several health care systems internationally have implemented protocolised sepsis recognition and treatment bundles for children to improve outcomes, as recommended by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign. Successful implementation of clinical pathways is challenging and dependent on nurse engagement. There is limited data on knowledge translation during implementation of sepsis quality improvement programs.

Methods

This cross-sectional, multicentre observational survey study evaluated knowledge and perceptions of Emergency Department nurses in relation to the recognition, escalation and management of paediatric sepsis following implementation of a sepsis pathway. The study was conducted between September 2019 and March 2020 across 14 Emergency Departments in Queensland, Australia. The primary outcome was a sepsis knowledge score. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted to identify factors impacting nurses’ perceptions of recognition, escalation and management of paediatric sepsis and their association with knowledge. Using a logistic mixed effects model we explored associations between knowledge, identified factors and other clinical, demographic and hospital site variables.

Results

In total, 676 nurses responded to the survey and 534 were included in the analysis. The median knowledge score was 57.1% (IQR = 46.7–66.7), with considerable variation observed between sites. The exploratory factor analysis identified five factors contributing to paediatric sepsis recognition, escalation and management, categorised as 1) knowledge and beliefs, 2) social influences, 3) beliefs about capability and skills delivering treatment, 4) beliefs about capability and behaviour and 5) environmental context. Nurses reported strong agreement with statements measuring four of the five factors, responding lowest to the factor pertaining to capability and skills delivering treatment for paediatric sepsis. The factors knowledge and beliefs, capability and skills, and environmental context were positively associated with a higher knowledge score. Years of paediatric experience and dedicated nurse funding for the sepsis quality improvement initiative were also associated with a higher knowledge score.

Conclusion

Translation of evidence to practice such as successful implementation of a sepsis care bundle, relies on effective education of staff and sustained uptake of protocols in daily practice. Our survey findings identify key elements associated with enhanced knowledge including dedicated funding for hospitals to target paediatric sepsis quality improvement projects.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-07128-2.

Identification and Adjudication of Adverse Events Following Rectal Cancer Surgery: Observational Case Series in a Region of Ontario, Canada

BACKGROUND

For patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery, we evaluated whether suboptimal preoperative surgeon evaluation of resection margins is a latent condition factor-a factor that is common, unrecognized, and may increase the risk of certain adverse events, including local tumour recurrence, positive surgical margin, nontherapeutic surgery, and in-hospital mortality.

METHODS

In this observational case series of patients who underwent rectal cancer surgery during 2016 in Local Health Integrated Network 4 region of Ontario (population 1.4 million), chart review and a trigger tool were used to identify patients who experienced the adverse events. An expert panel adjudicated whether each event was preventable or nonpreventable and identified potential contributing factors to adverse events.

RESULTS

Among 173 patients, 25 (14.5%) had an adverse event and 13 cases (7.5%) were adjudicated as preventable. Rate of surgeon awareness of preoperative margin status was low at 50% and similar among cases with and without an adverse event (p = 0.29). Suboptimal surgeon preoperative evaluation of surgical margins was adjudicated a contributing factor in all 11 preventable local recurrence, positive margin, and nontherapeutic surgery cases. Failure to rescue was judged a contributing factor in the two cases with preventable in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Suboptimal surgeon preoperative evaluation of surgical margins in rectal cancer is likely a latent condition factor. Optimizing margin evaluation may be an efficient quality improvement target.

High-Intensity vs Low-Intensity Knowledge Translation Interventions for Surgeons and Their Association With Process and Outcome Measures Among Patients Undergoing Rectal Cancer Surgery

IMPORTANCE

Surgeon-directed knowledge translation (KT) interventions for rectal cancer surgery are designed to improve patient measures, such as rates of permanent colostomy and in-hospital mortality, and to improve survival.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of sustained, iterative, integrated KT rectal cancer surgery interventions directed at all surgeons with process and outcome measures among patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery in a geographic region.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This quality improvement study used administrative data from patients who underwent rectal cancer surgery from April 1, 2004, to March 31, 2015, in 14 health regions in Ontario, Canada. Follow-up was completed on March 31, 2020.

EXPOSURES

Surgeons in 2 regions were offered intensive KT interventions, including annual workshops, audit and feedback sessions, and, in 1 of the 2 regions, operative demonstrations, from 2006 to 2012 (high-intensity KT group). Surgeons in the remaining 12 regions did not receive these interventions (low-intensity KT group).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Among patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery, proportions of preoperative pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), preoperative radiotherapy, and type of surgery were evaluated, as were in-hospital mortality and overall survival. Logistic regression models with an interaction term between group and year were used to assess whether process measures and in-hospital mortality differed between groups over time.

RESULTS

A total of 15 683 patients were included in the analysis (10 052 [64.1%] male; mean [SD] age, 65.9 [12.1] years), of whom 3762 (24.0%) were in the high-intensity group (2459 [65.4%] male; mean [SD] age, 66.4 [12.0] years) and 11 921 (76.0%) were in the low-intensity KT group (7593 [63.7%] male; mean [SD] age, 65.7 [12.1] years). A total of 1624 patients (43.2%) in the high-intensity group and 4774 (40.0%) in the low-intensity KT group underwent preoperative MRI (P < .001); 1321 (35.1%) and 4424 (37.1%), respectively, received preoperative radiotherapy (P = .03); and 967 (25.7%) and 2365 (19.8%), respectively, received permanent stoma (P < .001). In-hospital mortality was 1.6% (59 deaths) in the high-intensity KT group and 2.2% (258 deaths) in the low-intensity KT group (P = .02). Differences remained significant in multivariable models only for permanent stoma (odds ratio [OR], 1.67; 95% CI, 1.24-2.24; P < .001) and in-hospital mortality (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.51-0.87; P = .003). In both groups over time, significant increases in the proportion of patients undergoing preoperative MRI (from 6.3% to 67.1%) and preoperative radiotherapy (from 16.5% to 44.7%) occurred, but there were no significant changes for permanent stoma (25.4% to 25.3% in the high-intensity group and 20.0% to 18.3% in the low-intensity group) and in-hospital mortality (0.8% to 0.8% in the high-intensity group and 2.2% to 1.8% in the low-intensity group). Time trends were similar between groups for measures that did or did not change over time. Patient overall survival was similar between groups (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.90-1.11; P = .99).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this quality improvement study, between-group differences were found in only 2 measures (permanent stoma and in-hospital mortality), but these differences were stable over time. High-intensity KT group interventions were not associated with improved patient measures and outcomes. Proper evaluation of KT or quality improvement interventions may help avoid opportunity costs associated with ineffective strategies.