1 / 19

CUSP 4 MVP – VAP Exposure Receipt Assessment 1: Aggregated Results (Cohort 1)

CUSP 4 MVP – VAP Exposure Receipt Assessment 1: Aggregated Results (Cohort 1). Kisha Ali, MS Roshanak Hakimian. October 8, 2014. Exposure Receipt Assessment. Metric d esigned to close the gap between hospital unit leads and frontline providers

mitchell-jeremiah
Download Presentation

CUSP 4 MVP – VAP Exposure Receipt Assessment 1: Aggregated Results (Cohort 1)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CUSP 4 MVP – VAPExposure Receipt Assessment 1: Aggregated Results (Cohort 1) Kisha Ali, MS RoshanakHakimian October 8, 2014

  2. Exposure Receipt Assessment • Metric designed to close the gap between hospital unit leads and frontline providers • Purpose is to help identify and work with teams to provide needed training, resources, or other aids • Pioneered in the CUSP for VAP Maryland and Pennsylvania Pilot Project– paper based • Evolved for CUSP4MVP-VAP – now electronic, questions reflect most updated evidence for VAE prevention

  3. Exposure Receipt Assessment • Metric allows the implementation components of the project to be quantified • Data provided directly by front-line staff with direct-patient care • In congruence with the Implementation Assessment - tools are complementary • Assessment • consist of solely quantitative questions • Anonymous • Semi-annual • Supports improvement efforts of individual units

  4. Unit Participation:Results of Compliance Participation Overall: • Aggregated results from Cohort 1 • Administered 3 months into the project (May – Jun 2014) • 593 observations • 7 states Participation by State:

  5. Exposure Receipt Assessment Measures • Results divided into 3 categories based on question type to allow similar components to be examined together. The categorical measures are as follows: • Distribution of participants • CUSP Components of the intervention • MVP-VAP Components of the intervention

  6. Distribution of Participants Percentage of Units What is your role in the Unit?

  7. CUSP Components of the InterventionHow familiar are you with CUSP? Percentage of Units

  8. CUSP Components of the Intervention Do you have a CUSP team on your unit? Has CUSP been active at improving patient safety? Percentage of Units

  9. CUSP Components of the Intervention Have you watched a Science of Safety presentation Have you completed a Staff Safety Assessment Percentage of Units

  10. CUSP Components of the Intervention Have you used the Learning from Defects tool? For how many patients has your unit used Daily Goals?

  11. Summary:CUSP Components of the Intervention The majority of units participating in Cohort 1 are familiar with CUSP Half the units have CUSP teams, but only 50% of those teams are active, and even less are using all the CUSP tools Overall, providers believe that these teams are somewhat active at improving patient safety. Penetrance and use of the tools, Staff Safety Assessment and Science of Safety, are high Penetrance and use of the tools, Learning from Defects and Daily Goals, are low

  12. MVP - VAP Components of theIntervention Do you know your unit’s VAP or VAE rate(s)?

  13. MVP - VAP Components of the Intervention Percentage of Units Which of these interventions are being used by your Unit and how often?

  14. MVP - VAP Components of the Intervention Percentage of Units Do you believe that the interventions in MVP-VAP bundle will help to prevent VAE on your Unit?

  15. MVP - VAP Components of the Intervention Percentage of Units In your opinion, which of the following interventions are most likely to prevent VAE? (Select 3)

  16. MVP - VAP Components of the Intervention Percentage of Units In your opinion, where is the biggest opportunity to improve care of mechanically ventilated patients in your unit?

  17. Summary: VAP Components of the Intervention Overwhelming proportion of front-line providers believe the technical interventions prevent VAE Most front-line staff know their VAE rates All 6 MVP-VAP bundle interventions measured are being used at least 50% of the time Providers believe early mobility represents the biggest opportunity to improve care for MVP

  18. Conclusion • Results represent the perspective of 593 front-line clinicians surveyed in the Exposure Receipt Assessment 1 for Cohort 1 • Units will soon be able to track implementation successes and barriers over time via CECity platform • Assessments will continue to be administered semi-annually • Next ERA assessment will be administered Nov. 2014 • This assessment helps identify • Additional opportunities for education and training on the unit • Bridges the gap in information • Areas of success • Remember to involve your font-line staff in the CUSP4MVP-VAP project

  19. Thank you! Questions?

More Related