Journal
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL QUALITY
Volume 34, Issue 3, Pages 217-225Publisher
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1177/1062860618796947
Keywords
guideline adherence; feedback; peer comparison; emergency medicine; infectious disease
Categories
Funding
- Emergency Medicine Foundation Career Development Grant
Ask authors/readers for more resources
The objective was to estimate the effect of feedback with blinded peer comparison on emergency physician adherence to guidelines for appropriate antibiotic administration for inpatient pneumonia and completion of the 3-hour Surviving Sepsis Bundle for severe sepsis. The authors performed a quasi-experiment using a stepped wedge design at a single urban safety net hospital. Attending emergency physicians were randomized into 6 clusters. Once a cluster crossed into the intervention group, physicians in that cluster began receiving detailed feedback with blinded peer comparison on their adherence to guidelines for pneumonia and sepsis. Feedback with blinded peer comparison significantly improved guideline adherence from 52% without feedback to 65% with feedback (difference = 13%, 95% confidence interval = 4% to 22%). In adjusted analyses, the odds of providing guideline adherent care were 1.8 (95% confidence interval = 1.01-3.2) after the introduction of feedback with blinded peer comparison. Feedback with blinded peer comparison significantly improved emergency physician guideline adherence.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available