|Year : 2017 | Volume
| Issue : 1 | Page : 11-16
|Introducing the Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program for mechanically ventilated patients in Saudi Arabian Intensive Care Units
Raymond M Khan1, Maha Aljuaid1, Hanan Aqeel1, Mohammed M Aboudeif2, Shaimaa Elatwey2, Rajeh Shehab2, Yasser Mandourah3, Khalid Maghrabi4, Hassan Hawa4, Imran Khalid5, Ismael Qushmaq5, Asad Latif6, Bickey Chang6, Sean M Berenholtz6, Sultan Tayar3, Khloud Al-Harbi3, Amin Yousef7, Anas A Amr7, Yaseen M Arabi1
1 Department of Intensive Care, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
2 Department of Critical Care, International Extended Care Center, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
3 Department of Intensive Care, Prince Sultan Military Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
4 Department of Intensive Care, King Faisal Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
5 Department of Medicine, Section of Critical Care Medicine, King Faisal Hospital and Research Center- Gen Org., Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
6 Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, Johns Hopkins Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA
7 Department of Intensive Care, Al-Emam Abdulrahman Al-Faisal Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
|Date of Submission||03-Apr-2016|
|Date of Acceptance||08-May-2016|
|Date of Web Publication||6-Jan-2017|
Yaseen M Arabi
Department of Intensive Care, MC 1425, Professor, College of Medicine, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, P.O. Box 22490 Riyadh 11426
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
| Abstract|| |
Over the past decade, there have been major improvements to the care of mechanically ventilated patients (MVPs). Earlier initiatives used the concept of ventilator care bundles (sets of interventions), with a primary focus on reducing ventilator-associated pneumonia. However, recent evidence has led to a more comprehensive approach: The ABCDE bundle (Awakening and Breathing trial Coordination, Delirium management and Early mobilization). The approach of the Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program (CUSP) was developed by patient safety researchers at the Johns Hopkins Hospital and is supported by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to improve local safety cultures and to learn from defects by utilizing a validated structured framework. In August 2015, 17 Intensive Care Units (ICUs) (a total of 271 beds) in eight hospitals in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia joined the CUSP for MVPs (CUSP 4 MVP) that was conducted in 235 ICUs in 169 US hospitals and led by the Johns Hopkins Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality. The CUSP 4 MVP project will set the stage for cooperation between multiple hospitals and thus strives to create a countrywide plan for the management of all MVPs in Saudi Arabia.
Keywords: Care bundles, Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program, healthcare-associated infections, infection control, patient safety, ventilator-associated pneumonia
|How to cite this article:|
Khan RM, Aljuaid M, Aqeel H, Aboudeif MM, Elatwey S, Shehab R, Mandourah Y, Maghrabi K, Hawa H, Khalid I, Qushmaq I, Latif A, Chang B, Berenholtz SM, Tayar S, Al-Harbi K, Yousef A, Amr AA, Arabi YM. Introducing the Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program for mechanically ventilated patients in Saudi Arabian Intensive Care Units. Ann Thorac Med 2017;12:11-6
|How to cite this URL:|
Khan RM, Aljuaid M, Aqeel H, Aboudeif MM, Elatwey S, Shehab R, Mandourah Y, Maghrabi K, Hawa H, Khalid I, Qushmaq I, Latif A, Chang B, Berenholtz SM, Tayar S, Al-Harbi K, Yousef A, Amr AA, Arabi YM. Introducing the Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program for mechanically ventilated patients in Saudi Arabian Intensive Care Units. Ann Thorac Med [serial online] 2017 [cited 2022 Jun 29];12:11-6. Available from: https://www.thoracicmedicine.org/text.asp?2017/12/1/11/197765
Mechanical ventilation (MV) is a core intervention in modern Intensive Care Units (ICUs) and is a life-saving therapy for many clinical conditions. Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is the most common healthcare-associated infection in ICU patients, with a reported incidence rate between 9% and 28% in some studies. ,, Although the estimates of VAP-attributed mortality are controversial,  a recent meta-analysis of 6284 patients from 24 trials reports an overall VAP-attributable mortality rate of 13%.  Infection with VAP is associated with an increased use of broad-spectrum antibiotics,  an additional 9.6 days of MV  and increased ICU stay from 4.3 to 13 days,  and infection ultimately costs an average of more than US$ 40,000 per episode.  As the global population ages and more multidrug-resistant organisms emerge, the burden of VAP is projected to increase even further. , Therefore, VAP prevention and improving the care of mechanically ventilated patients (MVPs) have become an essential focus for the entire health-care system, and possibly even a national safety goal for many countries.
The aim of the review is to assess the initiatives for improving the care for MVPs, specifically the Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program for MVPs (CUSP 4 MVP), and the introduction of this program to Saudi Arabian ICUs.
| The Evolution of Strategies for Improving the Care of Mechanically Ventilated Patients|| |
Ventilator care bundles
In 2004, the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) 100 k lives campaign introduced the concept of a "care bundle" for the prevention of VAP.  A care bundle identifies a set of key interventions that, when implemented together as a best-practice approach, are expected to improve patient outcomes.  Resar et al. investigated the care bundle approach in a multicenter study involving 35 ICUs, and found that in the 21 units achieving >95% bundle compliance, the VAP rates decreased from 6.6 to 2.7 cases per 1000 ventilator days (P < 0.001); a 59% reduction.  More recently, Sinuff et al. showed that over a 2-year period, concordance with guidelines increased in another multicenter study involving 1320 patients, with a subsequent decrease in VAP rates from 14.2% to 8.8% (P = 0.03). 
Different combinations of ventilator care bundles have been reported. [Table 1] summarizes the VAP bundle elements from eight international organizations. Elevation of the head of the bed from 30° to 45°, interruption of sedation on a daily basis, and daily assessment for extubation are endorsed by all the organizations. All organizations also endorse the use of endotracheal tubes with subglottic suctioning except the IHI bundle, which is the only organization to include peptic ulcer prophylaxis and deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis as elements in their bundle. A daily oral wash with chlorhexidine is endorsed by six of the eight organizations, and maintaining cuff pressure between 20 and 30 cmH 2 O is advocated by half of the organizations. Furthermore, early mobility was included only in the recommendations of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy.
|Table 1: Comparing the bundle elements from several major institution and societies |
Click here to view
The ABCDE bundle: A comprehensive approach to improving the care of mechanically ventilated patients
In recent years, approaches to care have been broadened from focusing only on VAP prevention to focusing on a more comprehensive strategy on the basis of recent evidence of the benefit of the combined approach of the ABCDE bundle (Awakening and Breathing trial Coordination, Delirium management and Early mobilization).  The successful implementation of the ABCDE bundle requires improved communication among ICU team members, standardized care procedures, and better management of sedation, which will lead to reduction in delirium and weakness.  In addition, Balas et al. found that successful implementation of this bundle requires high-quality, timely, and reliable completion of independent tasks by trained individuals, effective communication between ICU team members, and effective leadership that can adapt to the needs of the local ICU culture and provide ongoing support, resources, and training. 
The Society of Critical Care Medicine released updated evidence-based guidelines for the management of pain, agitation, and delirium in ICUs (PAD guidelines).  The PAD guidelines prioritize treating and preventing significant pain, minimizing sedation, encouraging early liberation from MV, improving assessments and management of delirium, and facilitating early mobilization in the ICU. The guidelines recommend using sedation scales (the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale and the Riker Sedation-Agitation Scale) for managing sedation, and applying a target of both light levels of sedation and daily interruptions as techniques to reduce sedative exposure.
Wider outcome measurements
Although previous initiatives used VAP rates as the primary outcome measure, it has been increasingly recognized that MV causes harm beyond just VAP. Following the introduction of more comprehensive care bundles, such as the ABCDE bundle, wider outcome measures needed to be established to measure the benefit to patients and success of the program. The CDC, in conjunction with several critical care societies, convened a working group to address the limitations of the National Healthcare Safety Network definition of harm caused by MV, and they proposed a new approach.  Besides VAP, the new algorithm uses objective criteria for the diagnosis of ventilator-associated events (VAEs) and conditions (VACs) and infection-related ventilator-associated complications (IVACs).  This approach thereby broadens the definition of harm suffered by ventilated patients beyond pneumonia to include pulmonary edema, atelectasis, and acute respiratory distress syndrome.  The concept of VAEs has been validated and shown to be associated with longer MV treatment duration and ICU and hospital stays and higher mortality. ,,,,,, Klompas et al. showed that implementing simultaneous daily spontaneous awakening trials and spontaneous breathing trials resulted in a significant reduction in VAC (63%) and IVAC (35%). In addition, the mean duration of MV declined by 2.4 days, ICU length of stay declined by 3.0 days, and hospital length of stay declined by 6.3 days after this. 
| Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program|| |
The CUSP approach was developed by patient safety researchers at the Johns Hopkins Hospital (Baltimore, MD, USA) and is currently funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) in the USA.  CUSP is designed to improve local safety cultures and to guide organizations to learn from mistakes by utilizing a validated and structured framework. ,, Key components include identifying evidence-based interventions that improve the outcomes of interest; converting these interventions into behaviors; placing value on the wisdom of frontline staff; and empowering frontline staff to be actively involved in safety improvements. This approach has been linked to multiple improvements in clinical and human resources outcomes, including large-scale reductions in healthcare-acquired infections, ,,, mortality,  and associated costs. 
The CUSP intervention is a five-step iterative and validated process that aims to improve safety culture.  To implement the intervention, all participating units are requested to create a dedicated CUSP team. These teams ideally include a local physician and nursing champion, a senior executive, frontline health-care providers (physicians, nurses, and ancillary staff), an infection control provider, and hospital quality and safety leaders. Step 1 of the CUSP intervention educates staff on the science of improving patient safety, focusing on systems thinking and design. Step 2 asks the teams to identify local issues and/or defects, which are defined as anything that should not recur in either a clinical or operational context. Step 3 requires the unit to partner with a senior executive to help bridge the gap between the management and the frontline staff, prioritize safety hazards, and provide resources for local interventions. Step 4 introduces the staff to the tools that enable them to understand and learn from the identified local defects. Step 5 asks the teams to implement teamwork and communication tools.
Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program-4 mechanically ventilated patients
In 2013, the Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality at the Johns Hopkins Hospital, Maryland, USA, in collaboration with the Michigan Health and Hospital Association Keystone Center and the Department of Population Medicine at the Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute (Massachusetts, USA) launched the AHRQ-funded CUSP 4 MVP project. The program is a prospective cohort collaboration seeking to improve the care of MVPs and eliminate preventable harm associated with MV and is run in 235 ICUs in 169 US hospitals.
The project utilizes the CUSP concept; participating ICUs are instructed to create local unit-based multidisciplinary improvement teams (the CUSP teams). The project has three main tracks and one additional, optional track [Table 2]. Track 1 includes daily care procedures that include interventions that are applied to all MVPs: Specifically, elevation of the head of the bed to 30° or more, the use of subglottic suctioning, daily sedation and delirium assessments, and the daily performance of spontaneous awakening and breathing trials. Track 2 includes a daily early mobility assessment of all ICU patients; a nurse-led mobility program to achieve the highest level of mobility, and the identification of barriers to mobility and any clinical events associated with mobilizing patients. Track 3 combines both daily care procedures and daily early mobility assessments. Track 4 targets low tidal volume ventilation to prevent acute lung injury. 
|Table 2: CUSP 4 MVP-VAP strategies for improving the care of ventilated patients |
Click here to view
Participating teams are invited to join collaborative monthly webinars and receive E-mails and updates through the Johns Hopkins CUSP 4 MVP project web portal (https://armstrongresearch.hopkinsmedicine.org/cusp4mvp.aspx). This portal provides educational materials for frontline staff, infection control practitioners, and allied health-care professionals; evidence-based toolkits; data collection tools to evaluate local practices; and a robust web-based data platform to generate real-time data reports. Participating ICUs can track their performance over time and compare their performance with others. Reports can be shared with team members, frontline staff, and hospital leaders to sustain engagement in the program.
| Initiatives for Improving Ventilator Care in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia|| |
Most initiatives for improving ventilator care reported to date have focused on VAP prevention and have used the ventilator care bundle concept. A systemic review by Arabi et al. in 2008 found that the incidence of VAP in developing countries varied from 10 to 41.7 cases per 1000 ventilator days, with Saudi Arabia reporting a rate of 16.8 cases per 1000 ventilator days.  In 2014, the International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium surveillance study involving 43 developing countries, including Saudi Arabia, reported a VAP rate of 14.7 cases per 1000 ventilator days,  which may reflect a small global improvement in managing ventilated patients during the previous 5 years.
Al-Tawfiq et al. conducted a prospective surveillance in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, and found that VAP accounted for 19.8% of all device-associated infections in their hospital. During their study period (2004-2011), the implementation of a ventilator care bundle resulted in a significant decrease in the incidence of VAP from 8.9 to 1.9 cases per 1000 ventilator days, based on a pre- and post-implementation analysis.  In another prospective study in Riyadh, VAP rates decreased from 19.1 to 6.3 cases per 1000 ventilator days and bundle compliance improved from 49% to 99% over a 6-year period. In addition, this study found that VAP was associated with longer durations of MV (19.3 vs. 8.9 days, P < 0.01), stay in the ICU (22.2 vs. 10.7 days, P < 0.01), and stay in the hospital (85.5 vs. 61.6 days, P < 0.01). However, crude ICU and overall hospital mortality rates were similar in VAP and non-VAP patients.  Our group at King Abdul-Aziz Medical City, Riyadh, found that by employing a seven-element care bundle, the VAP rates declined significantly (8.6-2.0 cases per 1000 ventilator days, P < 0.001); however, there was no change in the duration of MV or ICU lengths of stay. 
Overall, several hospitals in Saudi Arabia have published findings on successful efforts to reduce VAP. We found seven articles that dealt with VAP prevention in Saudi Arabia [Table 3]. ,,,,,, All these studies were based on pre- and post-intervention observational designs except for two, which were prospective cohort studies. , The total number of patient ventilator days was 64,414, with the highest number (41,034) reported by Al-Dorzi et al.  Cost estimates were mentioned in two studies: Bukhari et al.  calculated a cost of $56,400 per 1000 ventilator days, whereas Al-Tawfiq  estimated a cost of $41,000 per episode of VAP. An average of five elements was employed in each VAP preventive bundle, with all hospitals adopting the IHI care bundle. However, some organizations introduced other prevention measures. Four of the seven institutions added oral care with chlorhexidine, ,,, two implemented the use of endotracheal tubes with subglottic secretion drainage, , and one monitored endotracheal tube cuff pressure.  The overall bundle compliance improved from 48.6% to 94.3% (an increase of 49%), with Al-Tawfiq and Abed  reporting the greatest improvement (75.6%). The average VAP rates decreased from 9.4 to 3.1 cases per 1000 ventilator days, which represents a reduction of 66%, and the biggest change (72%) was described by Al-Thaqafy et al. 
|Table 3: Summary of published studies on VAP prevention in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia |
Click here to view
Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program for mechanically ventilated patients (CUSP 4 MVP) to Saudi Arabian Intensive Care Units
In 2015, 17 ICUs in eight hospitals in Saudi Arabia (271 beds) joined CUSP 4 MVP. These health-care facilities include both private and government institutions, and they care for both acute and long-term ventilated patients. This project establishes the groundwork for cooperation between hospitals within Saudi Arabia to improve the quality of care in MVPs. The involvement of Saudi Arabian hospitals in this quality improvement project will help individual organizations grow and adapt evidence-based interventions to reduce VAC and VAP that can be used in daily, routine practice. Furthermore, this project will foster an environment to change the behavior of individual health-care workers and possibly the culture of the institutions. The project is currently ongoing and is expected to be completed in the end of 2016.
| Conclusion|| |
The important steps taken by the hospitals in Saudi Arabia participating in this program will help to standardize and improve the care of MVPs throughout the Kingdom, resulting in clinical best practices being applied to all patients, and thus ensuring better patient outcomes.
Financial support and sponsorship
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| References|| |
Kollef MH, Chastre J, Fagon JY, François B, Niederman MS, Rello J, et al.
Global prospective epidemiologic and surveillance study of ventilator-associated pneumonia due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Crit Care Med 2014;42:2178-87.
Kalanuria AA, Ziai W, Mirski M. Ventilator-associated pneumonia in the ICU. Crit Care 2014;18:208.
Rosenthal VD, Maki DG, Mehta Y, Leblebicioglu H, Memish ZA, Al-Mousa HH, et al.
International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium (INICC) report, data summary of 43 countries for 2007-2012. Device-associated module. Am J Infect Control 2014;42:942-56.
Chahoud J, Semaan A, Almoosa KF. Ventilator-associated events prevention, learning lessons from the past: A systematic review. Heart Lung 2015;44:251-9.
Melsen WG, Rovers MM, Groenwold RH, Bergmans DC, Camus C, Bauer TT, et al.
Attributable mortality of ventilator-associated pneumonia: A meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised prevention studies. Lancet Infect Dis 2013;13:665-71.
Hayashi Y, Morisawa K, Klompas M, Jones M, Bandeshe H, Boots R, et al.
Toward improved surveillance: The impact of ventilator-associated complications on length of stay and antibiotic use in patients in intensive care units. Clin Infect Dis 2013;56:471-7.
Rello J, Ollendorf DA, Oster G, Vera-Llonch M, Bellm L, Redman R, et al.
Epidemiology and outcomes of ventilator-associated pneumonia in a large US database. Chest 2002;122:2115-21.
Warren DK, Shukla SJ, Olsen MA, Kollef MH, Hollenbeak CS, Cox MJ, et al.
Outcome and attributable cost of ventilator-associated pneumonia among intensive care unit patients in a suburban medical center. Crit Care Med 2003;31:1312-7.
Ferrer M, Liapikou A, Valencia M, Esperatti M, Theessen A, Antonio Martinez J, et al.
Validation of the American Thoracic Society-Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines for hospital-acquired pneumonia in the intensive care unit. Clin Infect Dis 2010;50:945-52.
Jones RN. Microbial etiologies of hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia. Clin Infect Dis 2010;51 Suppl 1:S81-7.
How-to Guide: Prevent Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia. Available from: http://www.ihi.org
. [Last accessed on 2015 Oct 22].
Cinel I, Dellinger RP. Guidelines for severe infections: Are they useful? Curr Opin Crit Care 2006;12:483-8.
Resar R, Pronovost P, Haraden C, Simmonds T, Rainey T, Nolan T. Using a bundle approach to improve ventilator care processes and reduce ventilator-associated pneumonia. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2005;31:243-8.
Sinuff T, Muscedere J, Cook DJ, Dodek PM, Anderson W, Keenan SP, et al.
Implementation of clinical practice guidelines for ventilator-associated pneumonia: A multicenter prospective study. Crit Care Med 2013;41:15-23.
Pandharipande P, Banerjee A, McGrane S, Ely EW. Liberation and animation for ventilated ICU patients: The ABCDE bundle for the back-end of critical care. Crit Care 2010;14:157.
Vasilevskis EE, Ely EW, Speroff T, Pun BT, Boehm L, Dittus RS. Reducing iatrogenic risks: ICU-acquired delirium and weakness - Crossing the quality chasm. Chest 2010;138:1224-33.
Balas MC, Vasilevskis EE, Burke WJ, Boehm L, Pun BT, Olsen KM, et al.
Critical care nurses′ role in implementing the "ABCDE bundle" into practice. Crit Care Nurse 2012;32:35-8, 40-7.
Barr J, Fraser GL, Puntillo K, Ely EW, Gélinas C, Dasta JF, et al.
Clinical practice guidelines for the management of pain, agitation, and delirium in adult patients in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 2013;41:263-306.
Klompas M. Complications of mechanical ventilation - The CDC′s new surveillance paradigm. N Engl J Med 2013;368:1472-5.
Klompas M, Kleinman K, Murphy MV. Descriptive epidemiology and attributable morbidity of ventilator-associated events. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2014;35:502-10.
Zhu S, Cai L, Ma C, Zeng H, Guo H, Mao X, et al.
The clinical impact of ventilator-associated events: A prospective multi-center surveillance study. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;36:1388-95.
Klompas M, Khan Y, Kleinman K, Evans RS, Lloyd JF, Stevenson K, et al.
Multicenter evaluation of a novel surveillance paradigm for complications of mechanical ventilation. PLoS One 2011;6:e18062.
Klompas M, Kleinman K, Khan Y, Evans RS, Lloyd JF, Stevenson K, et al.
Rapid and reproducible surveillance for ventilator-associated pneumonia. Clin Infect Dis 2012;54:370-7.
Prospero E, Illuminati D, Marigliano A, Pelaia P, Munch C, Barbadoro P, et al.
Learning from Galileo: Ventilator-associated pneumonia surveillance. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2012;186:1308-9.
Klompas M, Anderson D, Trick W, Babcock H, Kerlin MP, Li L, et al.
The preventability of ventilator-associated events. The CDC Prevention Epicenters Wake Up and Breathe Collaborative. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2015;191:292-301.
Vigorito MC, McNicoll L, Adams L, Sexton B. Improving safety culture results in Rhode Island ICUs: Lessons learned from the development of action-oriented plans. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2011;37:509-14.
Weaver SJ, Lofthus J, Sawyer M, Greer L, Opett K, Reynolds C, et al.
A collaborative learning network approach to improvement: The CUSP learning network. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2015;41:147-59.
Pronovost PJ, Berenholtz SM, Goeschel CA, Needham DM, Sexton JB, Thompson DA, et al.
Creating high reliability in health care organizations. Health Serv Res 2006;41(4 Pt 2):1599-617.
Pronovost P, Needham D, Berenholtz S, Sinopoli D, Chu H, Cosgrove S, et al.
An intervention to decrease catheter-related bloodstream infections in the ICU. N Engl J Med 2006;355:2725-32.
Berenholtz SM, Lubomski LH, Weeks K, Goeschel CA, Marsteller JA, Pham JC, et al.
Eliminating central line-associated bloodstream infections: A national patient safety imperative. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2014;35:56-62.
Berenholtz SM, Pham JC, Thompson DA, Needham DM, Lubomski LH, Hyzy RC, et al.
Collaborative cohort study of an intervention to reduce ventilator-associated pneumonia in the intensive care unit. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2011;32:305-14.
Latif A, Kelly B, Edrees H, Kent PS, Weaver SJ, Jovanovic B, et al.
Implementing a multifaceted intervention to decrease central line-associated bloodstream infections in SEHA (Abu Dhabi Health Services Company) intensive care units: The Abu Dhabi experience. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;36:816-22.
Lipitz-Snyderman A, Steinwachs D, Needham DM, Colantuoni E, Morlock LL, Pronovost PJ. Impact of a statewide intensive care unit quality improvement initiative on hospital mortality and length of stay: Retrospective comparative analysis. BMJ 2011;342:d219.
Waters HR, Korn R Jr., Colantuoni E, Berenholtz SM, Goeschel CA, Needham DM, et al.
The business case for quality: Economic analysis of the Michigan Keystone Patient Safety Program in ICUs. Am J Med Qual 20;26:333-9.
The Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network: Ventilation with lower tidal volumes as compared with traditional tidal volumes for acute lung injury and the acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 2000;342:1301-8.
Arabi Y, Al-Shirawi N, Memish Z, Anzueto A. Ventilator-associated pneumonia in adults in developing countries: A systematic review. Int J Infect Dis 2008;12:505-12.
Al-Tawfiq JA, Amalraj A, Memish ZA. Reduction and surveillance of device-associated infections in adult intensive care units at a Saudi Arabian hospital, 2004-2011. Int J Infect Dis 2013;17:e1207-11.
Al-Dorzi HM, El-Saed A, Rishu AH, Balkhy HH, Memish ZA, Arabi YM. The results of a 6-year epidemiologic surveillance for ventilator-associated pneumonia at a tertiary care intensive care unit in Saudi Arabia. Am J Infect Control 2012;40:794-9.
Khan R, Al-Dorzi HM, Al-Attas K, Ahmed FW, Marini AM, Mundekkadan S, et al.
The impact of implementing multifaceted interventions on the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Am J Infect Control 2016;44:320-6.
Al-Thaqafy MS, El-Saed A, Arabi YM, Balkhy HH. Association of compliance of ventilator bundle with incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia and ventilator utilization among critical patients over 4 years. Ann Thorac Med 2014;9:221-6.
] [Full text]
Bukhari SZ, Hussain WM, Banjar AA, Fatani MI, Karima TM, Ashshi AM. Application of ventilator care bundle and its impact on ventilator associated pneumonia incidence rate in the adult intensive care unit. Saudi Med J 2012;33:278-83.
Al-Tawfiq JA, Abed MS. Decreasing ventilator-associated pneumonia in adult intensive care units using the Institute for Healthcare Improvement bundle. Am J Infect Control 2010;38:552-6.
El Azab SR, Abdelkarim M, Al Mutairi KB, Al Saqabi A, El Demerdash S. Combination of ventilator care bundle and regular oral care with chlorhexidine was associated with reduction in ventilator associated pneumonia. Egypt J Anaesth 2013;29:273-7.
Garout M. Compliance and association of ventilator associated pneumonia bundle strategy with ventilator associated pneumonia rate: A Saudi experience. J Bahria Univ Med Dent Coll 2013;3:11-5.
Klompas M, Branson R, Eichenwald EC, Greene LR, Howell MD, Lee G, et al.
Strategies to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia in acute care hospitals: 2014 update. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2014;35 Suppl 2:S133-54.
MacIntyre NR, Cook DJ, Ely EW Jr., Epstein SK, Fink JB, Heffner JE, et al.
Evidence-based guidelines for weaning and discontinuing ventilatory support: A collective task force facilitated by the American College of Chest Physicians; the American Association for Respiratory Care; and the American College of Critical Care Medicine. Chest 2001;120 6 Suppl: 375S-95S.
Muscedere J, Dodek P, Keenan S, Fowler R, Cook D, Heyland D; VAP Guidelines Committee and the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. Comprehensive evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for ventilator-associated pneumonia: Diagnosis and treatment. J Crit Care 2008;23:138-47.
Masterton RG, Galloway A, French G, Street M, Armstrong J, Brown E, et al.
Guidelines for the management of hospital-acquired pneumonia in the UK: Report of the working party on hospital-acquired pneumonia of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. J Antimicrob Chemother 2008;62:5-34.
Álvarez Lerma F, Sánchez García M, Lorente L, Gordo F, Añón JM, Álvarez J, et al.
Guidelines for the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia and their implementation. The Spanish "Zero-VAP" bundle. Med Intensiva 2014;38:226-36.
[Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]
|This article has been cited by|
||Implementation of the Comprehensive Unit-Based Safety Program to Improve Infection Prevention and Control Practices in Four Neonatal Intensive Care Units in Pune, India
| ||Julia Johnson, Asad Latif, Bharat Randive, Abhay Kadam, Uday Rajput, Aarti Kinikar, Nandini Malshe, Sanjay Lalwani, Tushar B. Parikh, Umesh Vaidya, Sudhir Malwade, Sharad Agarkhedkar, Melanie S. Curless, Susan E. Coffin, Rachel M. Smith, Matthew Westercamp, Elizabeth Colantuoni, Matthew L. Robinson, Vidya Mave, Amita Gupta, Yukari C. Manabe, Aaron M. Milstone |
| ||Frontiers in Pediatrics. 2022; 9 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Critical care nurses' compliance and barriers toward ventilator-associated pneumonia prevention guidelines: cross-sectional survey
| ||Khaled M. Al-Sayaghi |
| ||Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences. 2021; 16(2): 274 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||The effect of different concentrations of chlorhexidine on microbial colonization: A double-blinded randomized controlled study
| ||Sercan Özdemir, Gülengün Türk |
| ||International Journal of Nursing Practice. 2021; |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Implementing the comprehensive unit-based safety program model to improve the management of mechanically ventilated patients in Saudi Arabia
| ||Raymond M. Khan, Maha Al-Juaid, Hanan Al-Mutairi, George Bibin, John Alchin, Amal Matroud, Victoria Burrows, Ismael Tan, Salha Zayer, Brintha Naidv, Basim Kalantan, Yaseen M. Arabi |
| ||American Journal of Infection Control. 2019; 47(1): 51 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Does educating nurses with ventilator-associated pneumonia prevention guidelines improve their compliance?
| ||Sami M. Aloush |
| ||American Journal of Infection Control. 2017; 45(9): 969 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|