TY - JOUR
T1 - Detecting organisational innovations leading to improved ICU outcomes
T2 - A protocol for a double-blinded national positive deviance study of critical care delivery
AU - Chiou, Howard
AU - Jopling, Jeffrey K.
AU - Scott, Jennifer Yang
AU - Ramsey, Meghan
AU - Vranas, Kelly
AU - Wagner, Todd H.
AU - Milstein, Arnold
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.
PY - 2017/6/1
Y1 - 2017/6/1
N2 - Introduction There is substantial variability in intensive care unit (ICU) utilisation and quality of care. However, the factors that drive this variation are poorly understood. This study uses a novel adaptation of positive deviance approach-a methodology used in public health that assumes solutions to challenges already exist within the system to detect innovations that are likely to improve intensive care. Methods and analysis We used the Philips eICU Research Institute database, containing 3.3 million patient records from over 50 health systems across the USA. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IVa scores were used to identify the study cohort, which included ICU patients whose outcomes were felt to be most sensitive to organisational innovations. The primary outcomes included mortality and length of stay. Outcome measurements were directly standardised, and bootstrapped CIs were calculated with adjustment for false discovery rate. Using purposive sampling, we then generated a blinded list of five positive outliers and five negative comparators. Using rapid qualitative inquiry (RQI), blinded interdisciplinary site visit teams will conduct interviews and observations using a team ethnography approach. After data collection is completed, the data will be unblinded and analysed using a cross-case method to identify themes, patterns and innovations using a constant comparative grounded theory approach. This process detects the innovations in intensive care and supports an evaluation of how positive deviance and RQI methods can be adapted to healthcare. Ethics and dissemination The study protocol was approved by the Stanford University Institutional Review Board (reference: 39509). We plan on publishing study findings and methodological guidance in peer-reviewed academic journals, white papers and presentations at conferences.
AB - Introduction There is substantial variability in intensive care unit (ICU) utilisation and quality of care. However, the factors that drive this variation are poorly understood. This study uses a novel adaptation of positive deviance approach-a methodology used in public health that assumes solutions to challenges already exist within the system to detect innovations that are likely to improve intensive care. Methods and analysis We used the Philips eICU Research Institute database, containing 3.3 million patient records from over 50 health systems across the USA. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IVa scores were used to identify the study cohort, which included ICU patients whose outcomes were felt to be most sensitive to organisational innovations. The primary outcomes included mortality and length of stay. Outcome measurements were directly standardised, and bootstrapped CIs were calculated with adjustment for false discovery rate. Using purposive sampling, we then generated a blinded list of five positive outliers and five negative comparators. Using rapid qualitative inquiry (RQI), blinded interdisciplinary site visit teams will conduct interviews and observations using a team ethnography approach. After data collection is completed, the data will be unblinded and analysed using a cross-case method to identify themes, patterns and innovations using a constant comparative grounded theory approach. This process detects the innovations in intensive care and supports an evaluation of how positive deviance and RQI methods can be adapted to healthcare. Ethics and dissemination The study protocol was approved by the Stanford University Institutional Review Board (reference: 39509). We plan on publishing study findings and methodological guidance in peer-reviewed academic journals, white papers and presentations at conferences.
KW - INTENSIVE & CRITICAL CARE
KW - Organisation of health services
KW - QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
KW - Quality in health care
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85020500655&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85020500655&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-015930
DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-015930
M3 - Article
C2 - 28615274
AN - SCOPUS:85020500655
SN - 2044-6055
VL - 7
JO - BMJ open
JF - BMJ open
IS - 6
M1 - e015930
ER -