Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28412954›Full record

Trial reportImplementation science : IS2017

Does a quality improvement campaign accelerate take-up of new evidence? A ten-state cluster-randomized controlled trial of the IHI's Project JOINTS.

Eric C Schneider, Melony E Sorbero, Ann Haas, M Susan Ridgely, Dmitry Khodyakov, Claude M Setodji, Gareth Parry, Susan S Huang, Deborah S Yokoe, Don Goldmann

Erratum issuedAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Implementation science : IS, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Implementation methods of infection prevention measures in orthopedics and traumatology - a systematic review.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Eric C SchneiderRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA. es@cmwf.org.ORCID 0000-0002-1132-5084
Melony E SorberoRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA.
Ann HaasRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA.
M Susan RidgelyRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA.
Dmitry KhodyakovRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA.
Claude M SetodjiRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA.
Gareth ParryInstitute for Healthcare Improvement and Department of Pediatrics, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Susan S HuangDivision of Infectious Diseases and Health Policy Research Institute, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Irvine, CA, USA.
Deborah S YokoeDivision of Infectious Diseases, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Don GoldmannInstitute for Healthcare Improvement and Department of Pediatrics, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA decade ago, the Institute for Healthcare Improvement pioneered a quality improvement (QI) campaign, leveraging organizational and personal social networks to disseminate new practices. There have been few rigorous studies of the QI campaign approach.

methodsProject JOINTS (Joining Organizations IN Tackling SSIs) engaged a network of state-based organizations and professionals in a 6-month QI campaign promoting adherence to three new evidence-based practices known to reduce the risk of infection after joint replacement. We conducted a cluster-randomized trial including ten states (five campaign states and five non-campaign states) with 188 hospitals providing joint replacement to Medicare. We measured adherence to the evidence-based practices before and after the campaign using a survey of surgical staff and a difference-in-difference design with multivariable adjustment to compare adherence to each of the relevant practices and an all-or-none composite measure of the three new practices.

resultsIn the campaign states, there were statistically significant increases in adherence to the three new evidence-based practices promoted by the campaign. Compared to the non-campaign states, the relative increase in adherence to the three new practices in the campaign states ranged between 1.9 and 15.9 percentage points, but only one of these changes (pre-operative nasal screening for Staphylococcus aureus carriage and decolonization prior to surgery) was statistically significant (p < 0.05). On the all-or-none composite measure, adherence to all three evidence-based practices increased from 19.6 to 37.9% in the campaign states, but declined slightly in the comparison states, yielding a relative increase of 23 percentage points (p = 0.004). In the non-campaign states, changes in adherence were not statistically significant.

conclusionsWithin 6 months, in a cluster-randomized trial, a multi-state campaign targeting hospitals and professionals involved in surgical care and infection control was associated with an increase in adherence to evidence-based practices that can reduce surgical site infection.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, ReplacementGuideline AdherenceQuality ImprovementAcademies and InstitutesCluster AnalysisEvidence-Based PracticeHumansInfection ControlQuality Assurance, Health CareStaphylococcal InfectionsSurgical Wound Infection

Identifiers

PMID28412954
PMCPMC5393011

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.