标准与增强的实施策略以增加多药耐药生物警报工具的采用:一项集群随机试验。

IF 2.7 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Frontiers in health services Pub Date : 2025-09-18 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/frhs.2025.1566454
Cara Ray, Cassie Goedken, Ashley M Hughes, Geneva M Wilson, Natalie R Hicks, Margaret A Fitzpatrick, Makoto M Jones, Christopher Pfeiffer, James Stacey Klutts, Martin E Evans, Katie Joy Suda, Charlesnika T Evans
{"title":"标准与增强的实施策略以增加多药耐药生物警报工具的采用:一项集群随机试验。","authors":"Cara Ray, Cassie Goedken, Ashley M Hughes, Geneva M Wilson, Natalie R Hicks, Margaret A Fitzpatrick, Makoto M Jones, Christopher Pfeiffer, James Stacey Klutts, Martin E Evans, Katie Joy Suda, Charlesnika T Evans","doi":"10.3389/frhs.2025.1566454","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) launched VA Bug Alert (VABA) to identify admitted patients who are infected or colonized with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) in real time and promote timely infection prevention measures. However, initial VABA adoption was suboptimal. The objective of this project was to compare the effectiveness of standard vs. enhanced implementation strategies for improving VABA adoption.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>121 VA healthcare facilities were evaluated for adoption of VABA (at least 1 user registered at a facility) April 2021-September 2022. All facilities initially received standard implementation, which included: VABA revisions based on end-user feedback, education, and internal facilitation via monthly meetings with the MDRO Prevention Division of the VHA National Infectious Diseases Service. Surveys evaluated VABA perspectives among MDRO Prevention Coordinators (MPCs) and/or Infection Preventionists (IPs) before and after initial standard implementation. Facilities not registered for VABA following initial standard implementation (<i>n</i> = 31) were cluster-randomized to continue to receive standard implementation or enhanced implementation (audit and feedback reports and external facilitation via guided interviews to assess VABA use barriers). Percentages of facilities adopting VABA at baseline, after standard implementation (Follow-up 1), and after the enhanced vs. standard implementation trial period (Follow-up 2) were assessed and compared across time points using McNemar's test. VABA adoption was compared by trial condition using Fisher's exact test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Before education, 25% of 167 MPC/IP survey respondents across 116 facilities reported no knowledge/use of VABA. After education, 82% of 92 survey respondents across 80 facilities reported intending to use VABA. At baseline, VABA registrations were 40%. Registrations significantly increased aft Follow-up 1(75%, <i>p</i> < 0.01) and at Follow-up 2 (89%, <i>p</i> < 0.01). Adoption did not significantly differ by assigned implementation condition but was higher among facilities that completed all components of enhanced implementation than those who did not (87.5% vs. 43.5%, <i>p</i> = 0.045). Guided interviews revealed key facilitators of VABA registration, which included perceived fit, implementation activities, and organizational context (e.g., staffing resources).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Implementation efforts dramatically increased VABA registrations. Incorporating interview feedback to increase VABA's fit with users' needs may increase its use and help reduce MDRO spread in VA.</p>","PeriodicalId":73088,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in health services","volume":"5 ","pages":"1566454"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12488722/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Standard vs. enhanced implementation strategies to increase adoption of a multidrug-resistant organism alert tool: a cluster randomized trial.\",\"authors\":\"Cara Ray, Cassie Goedken, Ashley M Hughes, Geneva M Wilson, Natalie R Hicks, Margaret A Fitzpatrick, Makoto M Jones, Christopher Pfeiffer, James Stacey Klutts, Martin E Evans, Katie Joy Suda, Charlesnika T Evans\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/frhs.2025.1566454\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) launched VA Bug Alert (VABA) to identify admitted patients who are infected or colonized with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) in real time and promote timely infection prevention measures. However, initial VABA adoption was suboptimal. The objective of this project was to compare the effectiveness of standard vs. enhanced implementation strategies for improving VABA adoption.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>121 VA healthcare facilities were evaluated for adoption of VABA (at least 1 user registered at a facility) April 2021-September 2022. All facilities initially received standard implementation, which included: VABA revisions based on end-user feedback, education, and internal facilitation via monthly meetings with the MDRO Prevention Division of the VHA National Infectious Diseases Service. Surveys evaluated VABA perspectives among MDRO Prevention Coordinators (MPCs) and/or Infection Preventionists (IPs) before and after initial standard implementation. Facilities not registered for VABA following initial standard implementation (<i>n</i> = 31) were cluster-randomized to continue to receive standard implementation or enhanced implementation (audit and feedback reports and external facilitation via guided interviews to assess VABA use barriers). Percentages of facilities adopting VABA at baseline, after standard implementation (Follow-up 1), and after the enhanced vs. standard implementation trial period (Follow-up 2) were assessed and compared across time points using McNemar's test. VABA adoption was compared by trial condition using Fisher's exact test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Before education, 25% of 167 MPC/IP survey respondents across 116 facilities reported no knowledge/use of VABA. After education, 82% of 92 survey respondents across 80 facilities reported intending to use VABA. At baseline, VABA registrations were 40%. Registrations significantly increased aft Follow-up 1(75%, <i>p</i> < 0.01) and at Follow-up 2 (89%, <i>p</i> < 0.01). Adoption did not significantly differ by assigned implementation condition but was higher among facilities that completed all components of enhanced implementation than those who did not (87.5% vs. 43.5%, <i>p</i> = 0.045). Guided interviews revealed key facilitators of VABA registration, which included perceived fit, implementation activities, and organizational context (e.g., staffing resources).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Implementation efforts dramatically increased VABA registrations. Incorporating interview feedback to increase VABA's fit with users' needs may increase its use and help reduce MDRO spread in VA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73088,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in health services\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"1566454\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12488722/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in health services\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/frhs.2025.1566454\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in health services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frhs.2025.1566454","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:美国退伍军人健康管理局(VHA)推出退伍军人Bug Alert (VABA),实时识别住院患者感染或定植多药耐药菌(MDROs),促进及时预防感染措施。然而,最初的VABA采用并不理想。这个项目的目标是比较标准与增强的实现策略在改进VABA采用方面的有效性。方法:2021年4月至2022年9月,对121家VA医疗机构采用VABA(至少有1名用户在一家机构注册)进行评估。所有设施最初都得到了标准实施,其中包括:根据最终用户的反馈进行VABA修订、教育以及通过与VHA国家传染病服务处MDRO预防司的月度会议进行内部促进。调查评估了MDRO预防协调员(mpc)和/或感染预防专家(ip)在最初标准实施前后对VABA的看法。在初始标准实施后未注册VABA的设施(n = 31)被随机分组,继续接受标准实施或增强实施(审计和反馈报告以及通过引导访谈来评估VABA使用障碍的外部促进)。在基线、标准实施后(随访1)、增强与标准实施试验期(随访2)后采用VABA的设施的百分比使用McNemar测试进行评估和跨时间点比较。采用Fisher精确检验比较不同试验条件下VABA的采用情况。结果:在接受教育之前,116家机构的167名MPC/IP调查受访者中有25%表示不了解或不使用VABA。教育结束后,80家机构的92名受访者中有82%表示打算使用VABA。基线时,VABA注册率为40%。随访1后注册人数显著增加(75%,p p p = 0.045)。指导性访谈揭示了VABA注册的关键促进因素,包括感知契合度、实施活动和组织背景(例如,人员资源)。结论:实施工作显著增加了VABA注册。结合访谈反馈来提高VABA与用户需求的契合度,可能会增加VABA的使用,并有助于减少MDRO在VA中的传播。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Standard vs. enhanced implementation strategies to increase adoption of a multidrug-resistant organism alert tool: a cluster randomized trial.

Standard vs. enhanced implementation strategies to increase adoption of a multidrug-resistant organism alert tool: a cluster randomized trial.

Standard vs. enhanced implementation strategies to increase adoption of a multidrug-resistant organism alert tool: a cluster randomized trial.

Background: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) launched VA Bug Alert (VABA) to identify admitted patients who are infected or colonized with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) in real time and promote timely infection prevention measures. However, initial VABA adoption was suboptimal. The objective of this project was to compare the effectiveness of standard vs. enhanced implementation strategies for improving VABA adoption.

Methods: 121 VA healthcare facilities were evaluated for adoption of VABA (at least 1 user registered at a facility) April 2021-September 2022. All facilities initially received standard implementation, which included: VABA revisions based on end-user feedback, education, and internal facilitation via monthly meetings with the MDRO Prevention Division of the VHA National Infectious Diseases Service. Surveys evaluated VABA perspectives among MDRO Prevention Coordinators (MPCs) and/or Infection Preventionists (IPs) before and after initial standard implementation. Facilities not registered for VABA following initial standard implementation (n = 31) were cluster-randomized to continue to receive standard implementation or enhanced implementation (audit and feedback reports and external facilitation via guided interviews to assess VABA use barriers). Percentages of facilities adopting VABA at baseline, after standard implementation (Follow-up 1), and after the enhanced vs. standard implementation trial period (Follow-up 2) were assessed and compared across time points using McNemar's test. VABA adoption was compared by trial condition using Fisher's exact test.

Results: Before education, 25% of 167 MPC/IP survey respondents across 116 facilities reported no knowledge/use of VABA. After education, 82% of 92 survey respondents across 80 facilities reported intending to use VABA. At baseline, VABA registrations were 40%. Registrations significantly increased aft Follow-up 1(75%, p < 0.01) and at Follow-up 2 (89%, p < 0.01). Adoption did not significantly differ by assigned implementation condition but was higher among facilities that completed all components of enhanced implementation than those who did not (87.5% vs. 43.5%, p = 0.045). Guided interviews revealed key facilitators of VABA registration, which included perceived fit, implementation activities, and organizational context (e.g., staffing resources).

Conclusions: Implementation efforts dramatically increased VABA registrations. Incorporating interview feedback to increase VABA's fit with users' needs may increase its use and help reduce MDRO spread in VA.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信