EPICO 4.0. 'Total quality' in the management of invasive candidiasis in critically ill patients by analysing the integrated process.

BACKGROUND: A high quality integrated process in the clinical setting of non-neutropenic critically ill patients at risk for invasive candidiasis is a necessary tool to improve the management of these patients.

AIMS: To identify the key points on invasive candidiasis in order to develop a set of recommendations with a high level of consensus required for the creation of a total quality integrated process for the management of non-neutropenic critically ill patients at risk of invasive candidiasis.

METHODS: After a thorough review of the literature of the previous five years, a Spanish prospective questionnaire, which measured consensus by the Delphi technique, was anonymously conducted by e-mail, including 31 national multidisciplinary experts with extensive experience in invasive fungal infections, from six national scientific societies. The experts included a specialist in intensive care medicine, anesthetists, microbiologists, pharmacologists, and specialists in infectious diseases that responded 27 questions prepared by the coordination group. The educational objectives considered six processes that included knowledge of the local epidemiology, the creation and development of multidisciplinary teams, the definitions of the process, protocols, and indicators (KPI), an educational phase, hospital implementation, and the measurement of outcomes. The level of agreement among experts in each category to be selected should exceed 70%. In a second phase, after drawing up the recommendations of the selected processes, a face to face meeting with more than 60 specialists was held. The specialists were asked to validate the pre-selected recommendations.

MEASURES AND MAIN OUTCOMES: Firstly, 20 recommendations from all the sections were pre-selected: Knowledge of local epidemiology (3 recommendations), creation and development of multidisciplinary teams (3), definition of the process, protocols and indicators (1), educational phase (3), hospital implementation (3), and measurement of outcomes (7). After the second phase, 18 recommendations were validated, and it was concluded that the minimum team or core necessary for the development of an efficient program in the use of antifungal drugs in non-neutropenic critically ill patients must consist of a specialist in infectious diseases, a clinical pharmacist, a microbiologist, a specialist in intensive care medicine, a specialist in anesthesia and recovery, and an administrator or member of the medical management team, and, in order to be cost-effective, it should be implemented in hospitals with over 200 beds. In addition, it is recommended to apply a consensual check list for the evaluation of the diagnostic process and treatment of invasive candidiasis in patients that have started an antifungal treatment. The management of external knowledge and individual learning stand out as active educational strategies. The main strategies for measuring patient safety outcomes are the analysis of the results achieved, and learning activities; assess, review and refine the deployment of the processes; quality control; epidemiological surveillance and applied research; benchmarking; and basic research. The results of the integrated process should be annually disseminated outside the hospital.

CONCLUSIONS: Optimizing the management of invasive candidiasis requires the application of the knowledge and skills detailed in our recommendations. These recommendations, based on the Delphi methodology, facilitate the creation of a total quality integrated process in critically-ill patients at risk for invasive candidiasis.