Citations

BackgroundIt is widely assumed that the amount of alcohol in the blood reflects the amount of alcohol consumed. However, several factors in addition to amount of alcohol consumed can influence blood alcohol concentration (BAC). This study examines the effect of alcohol dose, concentration, and volume onBACin rats with a high‐alcohol‐drinking (HAD) phenotype.MethodsStudy 1 examined the relationship between the amount of alcohol consumed andBAC. Alcohol‐naïve, male,HADrats (N = 7) were given access to alcohol for 2 h/d for 9 consecutive days with food and water ad libitum. Alcohol intake andBACwere measured at 30, 60, and 90 minutes after onset of access. Study 2 examined the effects of altering alcohol dose, concentration, and volume onBAC(as measured by area under the curve). Alcohol‐naïve, male,HADrats (N = 39) were infused, via an intragastric cannulus, with 1.16, 2.44, or 3.38 g alcohol/kg body weight (BW), produced by varying alcohol volume while holding concentration constant or by holding volume constant while varying concentration. Other rats were infused with 10, 15, or 20% v/v alcohol solutions while holding dose constant.ResultsBACwas more strongly correlated with the ratio of alcohol intake (g/kgBW) to total fluid intake (mls) (R = 0.85 to 0.97,p < 0.05 top < 0.001) than it was with the amount of alcohol consumed (g/kgBW) (R = 0.70 to 0.81,p < 0.05). No effect of alcohol dose was seen during the first hour following the onset of an alcohol infusion regardless of whether dose was achieved by altering alcohol volume or concentration. After 1 hour, higher alcohol doses were predictive of greaterBACs.ConclusionsThe fact that a 3‐fold difference in alcohol dose did not result in significant differences inBACs during the first 30 minutes after ingestion of alcohol has potentially important implications for interpretation of studies that measure alcohol‐sensitive end points during this time.

Background Quality collaboratives are widely endorsed as a potentially effective method for translating and spreading best practices for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) care. Nevertheless, hospital success in improving performance through participation in collaboratives varies markedly. We sought to understand what distinguished hospitals that succeeded in shifting culture and reducing 30-day risk-standardised mortality rate (RSMR) after AMI through their participation in the Leadership Saves Lives (LSL) collaborative. Procedures We conducted a longitudinal, mixed methods intervention study of 10 hospitals over a 2-year period; data included surveys of 223 individuals (response rates 83%–94% depending on wave) and 393 in-depth interviews with clinical and management staff most engaged with the LSL intervention in the 10 hospitals. We measured change in culture and RSMR, and key aspects of working related to team membership, turnover, level of participation and approaches to conflict management. Main findings The six hospitals that experienced substantial culture change and greater reductions in RSMR demonstrated distinctions in: (1) effective inclusion of staff from different disciplines and levels in the organisational hierarchy in the team guiding improvement efforts (referred to as the ‘guiding coalition’ in each hospital); (2) authentic participation in the work of the guiding coalition; and (3) distinct patterns of managing conflict. Guiding coalition size and turnover were not associated with success (p values>0.05). In the six hospitals that experienced substantial positive culture change, staff indicated that the LSL learnings were already being applied to other improvement efforts. Principal conclusions Hospitals that were most successful in a national quality collaborative to shift hospital culture and reduce RSMR showed distinct patterns in membership diversity, authentic participation and capacity for conflict management.

Background Hospital organisational culture affects patient outcomes including mortality rates for patients with acute myocardial infarction; however, little is known about whether and how culture can be positively influenced. Methods This is a 2-year, mixed-methods interventional study in 10 US hospitals to foster improvements in five domains of organisational culture: (1) learning environment, (2) senior management support, (3) psychological safety, (4) commitment to the organisation and (5) time for improvement. Outcomes were change in culture, uptake of five strategies associated with lower risk-standardised mortality rates (RSMR) and RSMR. Measures included a validated survey at baseline and at 12 and 24 months (n=223; average response rate 88%); in-depth interviews (n=393 interviews with 197 staff); and RSMR data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Results We observed significant changes (p<0.05) in culture between baseline and 24 months in the full sample, particularly in learning environment (p<0.001) and senior management support (p<0.001). Qualitative data indicated substantial shifts in these domains as well as psychological safety. Six of the 10 hospitals achieved substantial improvements in culture, and four made less progress. The use of evidence-based strategies also increased significantly (per hospital average of 2.4 strategies at baseline to 3.9 strategies at 24 months; p<0.05). The six hospitals that demonstrated substantial shifts in culture also experienced significantly greater reductions in RSMR than the four hospitals that did not shift culture (reduced RSMR by 1.07 percentage points vs 0.23 percentage points; p=0.03) between 2011–2014 and 2012–2015. Conclusions Investing in strategies to foster an organisational culture that supports high performance may help hospitals in their efforts to improve clinical outcomes.