Search

To determine a) if a checklist covering a diverse group of intensive care unit protocols and objectives would improve clinician consideration of these domains and b) if improved consideration would change practice patterns.Pre- and post observational study.A 24-bed surgical/burn/trauma intensive care unit in a teaching hospital.A total of 1399 patients admitted between June 2006 and May 2007.The first component of the study evaluated whether mandating verbal review of a checklist covering 14 intensive care unit best practices altered verbal consideration of these domains. Evaluation was performed using real-time bedside audits on morning rounds. The second component evaluated whether the checklist altered implementation of these domains by changing practice patterns. Evaluation was performed by analyzing data from the Project IMPACT database after patients left the intensive care unit.Verbal consideration of evaluable domains improved from 90.9% (530/583) to 99.7% (669/671, p.0001) after verbal review of the checklist was mandated. Bedside consideration improved on the use of deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis (p.05), stress ulcer prophylaxis (p.01), oral care for ventilated patients (p0.01), electrolyte repletion (p.01), initiation of physical therapy (p.05), and documentation of restraint orders (p.0001). Mandatory verbal review of the checklist resulted in a greater than two-fold increase in transferring patients out of the intensive care unit on telemetry (16% vs. 35%, p.0001) and initiation of physical therapy (28% vs. 42%, p.0001) compared with baseline practice.A mandatory verbal review of a checklist covering a wide range of objectives and goals at each patient's bedside is an effective method to improve both consideration and implementation of intensive care unit best practices. A bedside checklist is a simple, cost-effective method to prevent errors of omission in basic domains of intensive care unit management that might otherwise be forgotten in the setting of more urgent care requirements.

Current guidelines recommend using antiseptic- or antibiotic-impregnated central venous catheters (CVCs) if, following a comprehensive strategy to prevent catheter-related blood stream infection (CR-BSI), infection rates remain above institutional goals based on benchmark values. The purpose of this study was to determine if chlorhexidine/silver sulfadiazine-impregnated CVCs could decrease the CR-BSI rate in an intensive care unit (ICU) with a low baseline infection rate.Pre-intervention and post-intervention observational study in a 24-bed surgical/trauma/burn ICU from October, 2002 to August, 2005. All patients requiring CVC placement after March, 2004 had a chlorhexidine/silver sulfadiazine-impregnated catheter inserted (post-intervention period).Twenty-three CR-BSIs occurred in 6,960 catheter days (3.3 per 1,000 catheter days)during the 17-month control period. After introduction of chlorhexidine/silver sulfadiazine-impregnated catheters, 16 CR-BSIs occurred in 7,732 catheter days (2.1 per 1,000 catheter days; p = 0.16). The average length of time required for an infection to become established after catheterization was similar in the two groups (8.4 vs. 8.6 days; p = 0.85). Chlorhexidine/silver sulfadiazine-impregnated catheters did not result in a statistically significant change in the microbiological profile of CR-BSIs, nor did they increase the incidence of resistant organisms.Although chlorhexidine/silver sulfadiazine-impregnated catheters are useful in specific patient populations, they did not result in a statistically significant decrease in the CR-BSI rate in this study, beyond what was achieved with education alone.