Implementing change in perfusion practice: quality improvement vs. experimentation?
The desire to optimize techniques and interventions that comprise clinical practice will inevitably involve the implementation of change in the process of care. To confirm the intended benefits of instituting clinical change, the process should be undertaken in a scientific manner. Although implementing changes in perfusion practice is limited by the availability of evidence based practice guidelines, we have the opportunity to audit our current practice according to institutional guidelines using quality improvement methods. Current electronic data collection technology is a useful tool available to facilitate the reporting of both clinical and process outcome improvements. The model of clinical effectiveness can be used as a systematic approach to introducing change in clinical practice, which involves reviewing the literature, acquiring appropriate skills and resources, auditing the change, and implementing continuous quality improvement to standardize the process. Finally, reporting the findings allows dissemination of the knowledge that can be generalized. Reporting change strengthens our efforts in clinical effectiveness, highlights the importance of perfusion practice, and increases the influence of the profession.
Newland
Richard F
RF
Department of Cardiac and Thoracic Surgery, Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, Australia.
Baker
Robert A
RA
D001315:Australia; D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000379:methods / Q000458:organization & administration*; D005112:Extracorporeal Circulation / Q000379:methods*; D013502:General Surgery / Q000458:organization & administration*; D010818:Practice Patterns, Physicians' / Q000458:organization & administration*; D011785:Quality Assurance, Health Care / Q000379:methods / Q000458:organization & administration*; D012586:Science / Q000379:methods / Q000458:organization & administration*; D057170:Translational Research, Biomedical / Q000379:methods / Q000458:organization & administration*