Clinical and Economic Impact of Adoption or De-adoption of Evidence-Based Clinical Practices in Adult Critical Care Medicine

Study Summary:

With a continuously evolving medical literature, there is uncertainty about how to select which practices should be priorities for clinical application. In preparation for this project, and to complement existing models for adoption, our team developed a model for facilitating de-adoption of low-value practices. We also reviewed the critical care literature to identify practices that reproducible evidence (two or more randomized trials and/or meta-analyses) suggests should be considered for adoption or de-adoption. Our study identified 14 high-value practices to consider for adoption, and 21 low-value practices for de-adoption. This project is the first step within a multi-step research program to translate our list of 35 critical care clinical practices with reproducible evidence into a prioritized list of practices that will be adopted or de-adopted in critical care units in Alberta.

Objective:

(1) To determine the clinical and economic impact of adoption of the 14 high-value practices and de-adoption of the 21 low-value practices identified in our scoping review.

Principal Investigator: Dr. Daniel Niven

Study Team: Dr. Fiona Clement, Dr. Jeanna Parsons Leigh, Dr. Andrea SooDr. Thomas Stelfox, Dr. Sharon Straus, Nubia Zepeda, Dr. Danny Zuege