search
Back to results

Early Recognition and Response to Increases in Surgical Site Infections Using Optimized Statistical Process Control Charts: The Early 2RIS Study (Early 2RIS)

Primary Purpose

Infection Control, Surgical Site Infection

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
United States
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Intervention Cluster
Sponsored by
Duke University
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional prevention trial for Infection Control

Eligibility Criteria

undefined - undefined (Child, Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • All patients who undergo one of 13 targeted procedures in 29 DICON study hospitals will be eligible for inclusion. The 13 targeted procedures include coronary artery bypass graft, cardiac valve replacement, colon surgery, herniorrhapy, knee arthroplasty, hip arthroplasty, Cesarean section, abdominal hysterectomy, vaginal hysterectomy, spinal fusion, laminectomy, carotid endarterectomy, and peripheral venous bypass. These procedures were selected because they are frequently performed in community hospitals and/or are associated with particularly adverse outcomes if complicated by SSI. Eligible procedures will be categorized by procedure type at each hospital using ICD9 codes published by the NHSN, per routine DICON activities. Six clusters were constructed from these procedures to ensure that surgeons who perform similar types of procedures were grouped together to limit potential bias. These clusters are labeled as Spine, GI, OB/GYN, Ortho, Vascular, and Cardiac. These clusters are the units for randomization and analysis.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • DICON hospitals that did not submit a letter of support for participating in the study will be excluded. Patients not undergoing one of these 13 procedure types at the 29 study hospitals will be excluded from the analysis.

Sites / Locations

  • Duke University Health System

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Experimental

No Intervention

Arm Label

Intervention Cluster

Control Cluster

Arm Description

Surgical surveillance data submitted to the DICON Surgical Database will undergo immediate analysis by optimized SPC methods. If a signal is generated, study personnel in DICON will be notified to adjudicate the signal and determine if further action is required. Optimized SPC methods include the application of two SPC charts. The investigator determined that when either chart identifies a signal, the study will have approximately 90% sensitivity and 65% specificity to identify important increases in rates of SSI.

Local personnel in clusters randomized to traditional surveillance and feedback will receive bar graph reports and data interpretation per routine DICON surveillance. These reports will be provided every 6 months.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Differences in rates of SSI.
SSI rate will be calculated as number of SSI/100 procedures per month SSIs will be defined using standard NHSN definitions DICON personnel train local infection preventionists about how to use and interpret SSI definitions. Thus, standard definitions and methods are used at all study hospitals. Cluster-level risk adjustment will be performed using median surgical volume and median NHSN Risk Index (an operation- and patient-specific risk score that predicts SSI) per cluster.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Proportion of SSIs determined to be potentially preventable
Among SSIs investigated, each will be provided a "preventability score" after reviewing if best practices were followed.
Description of and difference in number and type of signals
Signals identified using optimized SPC will be compared to signals identified using standard surveillance; Not a patient-specific outcome
Difference in number of outbreaks identified
Outbreaks identified using optimized SPC will be compared to outbreaks identified using standard surveillance; Not a patient-specific outcome
Difference in number of investigations of increased rates of SSI
Signals may or may not lead to subsequent investigation. Investigators will compare the number of investigations performed following the use of optimized SPC to the number of investigations performed following the use of standard surveillance; signals identified using standard surveillance; Not a patient-specific outcome
Total number and differences in proportion of signals that led to investigations
Signals may or may not lead to subsequent investigation. Investigators will compare the number of investigations performed following the use of optimized SPC to the number of investigations performed following the use of standard surveillance; signals identified using standard surveillance; Not a patient-specific outcome
Time required to investigate signals
Investigators will monitor the time required to investigate signals and compare the time required following the use of optimized SPC methods to the time required following the use of standard surveillance; not a patient-specific outcome
Timing of signals
Investigators will determine how promptly the different surveillance strategies identify signals and compare average/median time to signal between the two study arms; not a patient-specific outcome
Time to completion of investigation
Investigators will determine the time required to complete investigations
Strength and type of signals
Investigators will compare the strength and types of signals generated from each type of surveillance with subsequent adjudication and intervention.

Full Information

First Posted
March 6, 2017
Last Updated
April 1, 2020
Sponsor
Duke University
Collaborators
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT03075813
Brief Title
Early Recognition and Response to Increases in Surgical Site Infections Using Optimized Statistical Process Control Charts: The Early 2RIS Study
Acronym
Early 2RIS
Official Title
Early Recognition and Response to Increases in Surgical Site Infections Using Optimized Statistical Process Control Charts
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
March 2020
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
March 6, 2017 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
February 29, 2020 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
February 29, 2020 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
Duke University
Collaborators
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
No

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
The purpose of this quality improvement study is to measure the effectiveness of surveillance using optimized statistical process control (SPC) methods and feedback on rates of surgical site infection (SSI) compared to traditional surveillance and feedback. The primary objective is to determine if hospital clusters randomized to receive feedback from optimized SPC surveillance methods collectively have lower rates of SSI compared to hospital clusters randomized to receiving feedback from traditional surveillance methods. Secondary objectives are 1) to estimate and compare the number of signals identified using optimized SPC methods and traditional surveillance methods; 2) to estimate and compare the time and effort required to investigate signals generated using optimized SPC methods and traditional surveillance methods; and 3) to estimate the number and proportion of false-positive signals identified using optimized SPC methods and traditional surveillance methods. The Early 2RIS study will be a prospective, multicenter cluster randomized controlled trial using stepped wedge design. The active component of the quality improvement study will be performed in 29 DICON hospitals over three years, from March 2017 through February 2020. Clusters randomized to intervention will receive feedback on increasing rates of SSI identified through optimized SPC methods. This intervention is expected to decrease the subsequent rate of SSIs by closing the feedback loop on SSI outcomes. Participating study hospitals will all be members of DICON, a network of 43 community hospitals in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, and Virginia that provides community hospitals access to consultative services from infection prevention experts, data analyses and benchmarking, and educational materials designed by faculty from Duke. This study is considered part of routine quality improvement measures and a part of previously established agreements between DICON and the community hospitals. Data flow and communication are outlined in detail in approved protocols determined to be exempt research by the DUHS IRB. Briefly, existing clinical data are extracted from participating hospitals' electronic medical record into discrete files according to DICON specifications. Then a de-identification process removes direct patient identifiers into a limited dataset. The majority of data collection will occur through methods already developed and utilized by study hospitals. In brief, each hospital routinely submits limited datasets to the DICON Surgical Surveillance Database, including the following variables: hospital, type of procedure, patient identifier, date of procedure, age, sex, surgeon identifier, start/stop times, ASA score, wound class, risk index, SSI (Yes/No), date of infection, type of SSI, location at diagnosis and organism. No identifiable patient or surgeon data are transmitted to the DICON Surgical Database. Data definitions and data collection methods are standardized across DICON hospitals. Following signal adjudication, additional data will be collected in a REDCap database to document actions and rationale.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Infection Control, Surgical Site Infection

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Prevention
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
Investigator
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
29 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Intervention Cluster
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Surgical surveillance data submitted to the DICON Surgical Database will undergo immediate analysis by optimized SPC methods. If a signal is generated, study personnel in DICON will be notified to adjudicate the signal and determine if further action is required. Optimized SPC methods include the application of two SPC charts. The investigator determined that when either chart identifies a signal, the study will have approximately 90% sensitivity and 65% specificity to identify important increases in rates of SSI.
Arm Title
Control Cluster
Arm Type
No Intervention
Arm Description
Local personnel in clusters randomized to traditional surveillance and feedback will receive bar graph reports and data interpretation per routine DICON surveillance. These reports will be provided every 6 months.
Intervention Type
Other
Intervention Name(s)
Intervention Cluster
Intervention Description
Surgical surveillance date will be analyzed by optimized SPC methods. if signal is generated, study personnel in DICON will be notified to adjudicate the signal and determine if further action is needed.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Differences in rates of SSI.
Description
SSI rate will be calculated as number of SSI/100 procedures per month SSIs will be defined using standard NHSN definitions DICON personnel train local infection preventionists about how to use and interpret SSI definitions. Thus, standard definitions and methods are used at all study hospitals. Cluster-level risk adjustment will be performed using median surgical volume and median NHSN Risk Index (an operation- and patient-specific risk score that predicts SSI) per cluster.
Time Frame
SSIs can be diagnosed up 30 to 90 days following the procedure, depending on the type of procedure
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Proportion of SSIs determined to be potentially preventable
Description
Among SSIs investigated, each will be provided a "preventability score" after reviewing if best practices were followed.
Time Frame
diagnosed up 30 to 90 days following the procedure, depending on the type of procedure
Title
Description of and difference in number and type of signals
Description
Signals identified using optimized SPC will be compared to signals identified using standard surveillance; Not a patient-specific outcome
Time Frame
36 months (entire study period)
Title
Difference in number of outbreaks identified
Description
Outbreaks identified using optimized SPC will be compared to outbreaks identified using standard surveillance; Not a patient-specific outcome
Time Frame
36 months (entire study period)
Title
Difference in number of investigations of increased rates of SSI
Description
Signals may or may not lead to subsequent investigation. Investigators will compare the number of investigations performed following the use of optimized SPC to the number of investigations performed following the use of standard surveillance; signals identified using standard surveillance; Not a patient-specific outcome
Time Frame
36 months (entire study period)
Title
Total number and differences in proportion of signals that led to investigations
Description
Signals may or may not lead to subsequent investigation. Investigators will compare the number of investigations performed following the use of optimized SPC to the number of investigations performed following the use of standard surveillance; signals identified using standard surveillance; Not a patient-specific outcome
Time Frame
36 months (entire study period)
Title
Time required to investigate signals
Description
Investigators will monitor the time required to investigate signals and compare the time required following the use of optimized SPC methods to the time required following the use of standard surveillance; not a patient-specific outcome
Time Frame
36 months (entire study period)
Title
Timing of signals
Description
Investigators will determine how promptly the different surveillance strategies identify signals and compare average/median time to signal between the two study arms; not a patient-specific outcome
Time Frame
36 months (entire study period)
Title
Time to completion of investigation
Description
Investigators will determine the time required to complete investigations
Time Frame
36 months (entire study period)
Title
Strength and type of signals
Description
Investigators will compare the strength and types of signals generated from each type of surveillance with subsequent adjudication and intervention.
Time Frame
36 months (entire study period)

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: All patients who undergo one of 13 targeted procedures in 29 DICON study hospitals will be eligible for inclusion. The 13 targeted procedures include coronary artery bypass graft, cardiac valve replacement, colon surgery, herniorrhapy, knee arthroplasty, hip arthroplasty, Cesarean section, abdominal hysterectomy, vaginal hysterectomy, spinal fusion, laminectomy, carotid endarterectomy, and peripheral venous bypass. These procedures were selected because they are frequently performed in community hospitals and/or are associated with particularly adverse outcomes if complicated by SSI. Eligible procedures will be categorized by procedure type at each hospital using ICD9 codes published by the NHSN, per routine DICON activities. Six clusters were constructed from these procedures to ensure that surgeons who perform similar types of procedures were grouped together to limit potential bias. These clusters are labeled as Spine, GI, OB/GYN, Ortho, Vascular, and Cardiac. These clusters are the units for randomization and analysis. Exclusion Criteria: DICON hospitals that did not submit a letter of support for participating in the study will be excluded. Patients not undergoing one of these 13 procedure types at the 29 study hospitals will be excluded from the analysis.
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Deverick Anderson, MD
Organizational Affiliation
Duke Health
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Duke University Health System
City
Durham
State/Province
North Carolina
ZIP/Postal Code
27705
Country
United States

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
No
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
36277312
Citation
Baker AW, Ilies I, Benneyan JC, Lokhnygina Y, Foy KR, Lewis SS, Wood B, Baker E, Crane L, Crawford KL, Cromer AL, Padgette P, Roach L, Adcock L, Nehls N, Salem J, Bratzler D, Dellinger EP, Greene LR, Huang SS, Mantyh CR, Anderson DJ. Early recognition and response to increases in surgical site infections using optimised statistical process control charts-The early 2RIS trial: A multicentre stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial. EClinicalMedicine. 2022 Oct 17;54:101698. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101698. eCollection 2022 Dec.
Results Reference
derived
PubMed Identifier
33115527
Citation
Anderson DJ, Ilies I, Foy K, Nehls N, Benneyan JC, Lokhnygina Y, Baker AW. Early recognition and response to increases in surgical site infections using optimized statistical process control charts-the Early 2RIS Trial: a multicenter cluster randomized controlled trial with stepped wedge design. Trials. 2020 Oct 28;21(1):894. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04802-4.
Results Reference
derived

Learn more about this trial

Early Recognition and Response to Increases in Surgical Site Infections Using Optimized Statistical Process Control Charts: The Early 2RIS Study

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs