Measuring evidence-based clinical guideline compliance in the paediatric intensive care unit

4Citations
Citations of this article
19Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background Evidence-based clinical care guidelines improve medical treatment by reducing error, improving outcomes and possibly lowering healthcare costs. While some data exist on individual guideline compliance, no data exist on overall compliance to multiple nuanced guidelines in a paediatric intensive care setting. Methods Guideline compliance was observed and measured with a prospective cohort at a tertiary academic paediatric medical-surgical intensive care unit. Adherence to 19 evidence-based clinical care guidelines was evaluated in 814 patients, and reasons for non-compliance were noted along with other associated outcomes. Measurements and main results Overall facility compliance was unexpectedly high at 77.8% over 4512 compliance events, involving 826 admissions. Compliance varied widely between guidelines. Guidelines with the highest compliance were stress ulcer prophylaxis (97.1%) and transfusion administration such as fresh frozen plasma (97.4%) and platelets (94.8%); guidelines with the lowest compliance were ventilator-associated pneumonia prevention (28.7%) and vitamin K administration (34.8%). There was no significant change in compliance over time with observation. Guidelines with binary decision branch points or single-page decision flow diagrams had a higher average compliance of 90.6%. Poor compliance was more often observed with poor perception of guideline trustworthiness and time limitations. Conclusions Measuring guideline compliance, though onerous, allowed for evaluation of current clinical practices and identified actionable areas for institutional improvement.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hay, R. E., Martin, D. A., Rutas, G. J., Jamal, S. M., & Parsons, S. J. (2024). Measuring evidence-based clinical guideline compliance in the paediatric intensive care unit. BMJ Open Quality, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2023-002485

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free