Barriers and Facilitators To making it Happen! Daren K. Heyland Professor of Medicine Queen’s University, Kingston General Hospital Kingston, ON Canada Disclosures Research Contracts with the Following Companies • Nestle • Baxter • Fresenius Kabi • Abbott Nutrition Results of 2007 International Nutrition Practice Audit Average time to start of EN : 46.5 hours (site average range: 8.2-149.1 hours) In patients with high gastric residual volumes: use of motility agents 58.7% (site average range: 0-100%) use of small bowel feeding 14.7% (range: 0-100%) Cahill N Crit Care Med 2010 (in press) Adequacy of EN: Kcals Relationship Between Increased Calories and 60 day Mortality BMI Group Odds Ratio Overall 0.76 0.61 0.95 0.014 <20 0.52 0.29 0.95 0.033 20-<25 0.62 0.44 0.88 0.007 25-<30 1.05 0.75 1.49 0.768 30-<35 1.04 0.64 1.68 0.889 35-<40 0.36 0.16 0.80 0.012 >=40 0.63 0.32 1.24 0.180 95% Confidence Limits P-value Legend: Odds of 60-day Mortality per 1000 kcals received per day adjusting for nutrition days, BMI, age, admission category, admission diagnosis and APACHE II score. Alberda Int Care Med 2009;35:1728 Relationship of Caloric Intake, 60 day Mortality and BMI 60 BMI All Patients < 20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 >40 Mortality (%) 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 500 1000 1500 Calories Delivered 2000 A Qualitative Assessment of “Barriers and Facilitators” to Implementing Nutrition CPGs in ICU Multiple case study 4 case ICU sites Purposeful sampling Semi-structured key informant interviews (n=28) Min. 5 years ICU experience Employed at case ICU site May 2004 Document review Jones NCP 2007;22:449 Potential Barriers Resistance to change Patients clinical condition Lack of awareness Information overload Weak evidence Resource constraints Slow administrative process Impractical / Complex Nursing workload Limited critical care experience Potential Facilitators Agreement of the attending physician & ICU team Part of routine practice Dietitian / Opinion leader Access / Visibility Easy to follow and perform Provision of education Open discussion Favored Implementation Strategies Informal one-on-one discussions Academic detailing, ward rounds Protocols Pre printed orders, Check-list, algorithms, Bed-side reminders Feedback and audit Site reports The Impact of Enteral Feeding Protocols on Enteral Nutrition Delivery: Results of a multicenter observational study International, prospective, observational, cohort studies conducted in 2007 and 2008 from 269 Intensive Care Units (ICUs) in 28 countries Included 5497 mechanically ventilated adult patients > 3 days in ICU Sites recorded the presence or absence of a feeding protocol Sites provided selected nutritional data on enrolled patients from ICU admission to ICU discharge for a maximum of 12 days. 78% of sites reported use of Feeding Protocol P<0.05 Heyland JPEN 2010 ( in press) Initial Efficacy and Tolerability of Early Enteral Nutrition with Immediate or Gradual Introduction in Intubated Patients • This study randomized 100 mechanically ventilated patients (not in shock) to Immediate goal rate vs gradual ramp up (our usual standard). • The immediate goal group rec’d more calories with no increase in complications Desachy ICM 2008;34:1054 The Efficacy of Enhanced Protein-Energy Provision via the Enteral Route in Critically Ill Patients: The PEP uP Protocol! Not all critically ill patients are the same; we have different feeding options based on hemodynamic stability and suitability for high volume intragastric feeds. Use semi elemental solution In select patients, we start the EN immediately at goal rate, not at 25 ml/hr. We target a 24 hour volume of EN rather than an hourly rate and provide the nurse with the latitude to increase the hourly rate to make up the 24 hour volume. Tolerate higher GRV threshold (250 ml or more) Motility agents and protein supplements are started immediately, rather than started when there is a problem. A Major Paradigm Shift in How we Feed Enterally The Efficacy of Enhanced Protein-Energy Provision via the Enteral Route in Critically Ill Patients: The PEP uP Protocol! Figure 2.1 Adequacy of Calories from EN (Before Group vs. After Group on Full Volume Feeds) 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ICU Day PLOT P-value Day 1 0.049 Before Group Day 2 0.0005 Day 3 0.17 Day 4 0.31 After Group Day 5 0.60 Day 6 0.34 Day 7 0.20 Total 0.015 Heyland (in submission) % protein received/prescribed The Efficacy of Enhanced Protein-Energy Provision via the Enteral Route in Critically Ill Patients: The PEP uP Protocol! Figure 2.2 Adequacy of Protein from EN (Before Group vs. After Group on Full Volume Feeds) 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ICU Day PLOT P-value Day 1 0.014 Before Group Day 2 <0.0001 Day 3 0.0015 Day 4 0.13 After Group Day 5 0.57 Day 6 0.62 Day 7 0.34 Total 0.002 Heyland (in submission) Need for Constant Reminders Poster Reminder HOB sticker Reminder screensavers Special DVD presentation Early Enteral Nutrition in the ICU: The Clock Is Ticking! Daren K. Heyland, MD, FRCPC, MSc Professor of Medicine Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario www.criticalcarenutrition.com Overall Site Performance Practice Changing Interventions Protocolize/automate care Improve organizational culture Develop Dietitian and other KOL as local opinion leaders Audit and feedback with bench-marked site reports Assess barriers and have interactive workshops with small group problem solving Implement strategies with rapid cycle change (PDSA) Educational reminders (manuals, posters, pocket cards) One on one academic detailing What works best at your site? (barriers and enablers will vary site to site) What is already working well at your site? (strengths and weakness are different across sites) Conclusions Long way to go to narrow the quality gap Need to enrich our understanding on how best to achieve that; but in the mean time, act now! With our emerging understanding of the problems, we need to develop more targeted or strategic solutions. Strengths & weaknesses; barriers & enablers vary across sites. Stay tuned…