Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from BMC Proceedings and BioMed Central.

This article is part of the supplement: International Conference on Prevention & Infection Control (ICPIC 2011)

Open Access Oral presentation

Imapct of systems ambiguity on guideline compliance in intensive care units

AP Gurses1*, Y Xiao2 and K Seidl3

  • * Corresponding author: AP Gurses

Author Affiliations

1 Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Som, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA

2 Baylor Health Systems, Dallas, TX, USA

3 University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, USA

For all author emails, please log on.

BMC Proceedings 2011, 5(Suppl 6):O48  doi:10.1186/1753-6561-5-S6-O48


The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1753-6561/5/S6/O48


Published:29 June 2011

© 2011 Gurses et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Introduction / objectives

Health care associated infections (HAI) in intensive care units (ICU) can be significantly reduced or eliminated by increasing care providers’ compliance with evidence-based guidelines. Using a human factors and systems engineering approach, we conducted a qualitative study to identify the underlying causes of non-compliance with evidence-based guidelines for preventing four types of HAI in ICUs.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured, in-depth interviews with a total 20 surgical ICU care providers including three attending physicians, two residents, six nurses, three quality improvement coordinators, two infection control practitioners, two respiratory therapists and two pharmacists. Thematic analysis of the qualitative data was performed using a grounded theory approach.

Results

A new framework called “systems ambiguity” that can be used to explain and prevent care providers' non-compliance with evidence-based guidelines emerged from the data. We define systems ambiguity as “uncertainty or vagueness that may prevent a work system from achieving its purpose.” Five major types of ambiguity that can affect care providers' compliance behaviors have been identified: task ambiguity, responsibility ambiguity, expectation ambiguity, method ambiguity, and exception ambiguity.

Conclusion

Systems ambiguity framework can be used to (1) identify the underlying causes of care providers’ non-compliance with guidelines aimed at preventing HAI, and (2) guide efforts for developing effective interventions aimed at improving compliance rates. Future research should focus on designing multi-faceted interventions based on the systems ambiguity framework and evaluating the impact of these interventions.

Disclosure of interest

A. Gurses Grant/Research support from AHRQ (K Award) and National Patient Safety Foundation, Y. Xiao: None declared, K. Seidl: None declared.