-
Resuscitation Nov 2022Objective: To conduct a systematic review of the published evidence related to family presence during adult resuscitation from cardiac arrest. (Review)
Review
AIM
Objective: To conduct a systematic review of the published evidence related to family presence during adult resuscitation from cardiac arrest.
METHODS
This review, registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021242384) and reported according to PRISMA guidelines, included studies of adult cardiac arrest with family presence during resuscitation that reported one or more patient, family or provider outcomes. Three databases (Medline, CINAHL and EMBASE) were searched from inception to 10/05/2022. Two investigators screened the studies, extracted data, and assessed risks of bias using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The synthesis approach was guided by Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis (SWiM) reporting guidelines and a narrative synthesis method.
RESULTS
The search retrieved 9,459 citations of which 31 were included: 18 quantitative studies (including two RCTs), 12 qualitative studies, and one mixed methods study. The evidence was of very low or low certainty. There were four major findings. High-certainty evidence regarding the effect of family presence during resuscitation on patient outcomes is lacking. Family members had mixed outcomes in terms of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, and experience of witnessing resuscitation. Provider experience was variable and resuscitation setting, provider education, and provider experience were major influences on family presence during resuscitation. Finally, providers reported that a family support person and organisational guidelines were important for facilitating family presence during resuscitation.
CONCLUSION
The effect of family presence during resuscitation varies between individuals. There was variability in the effect of family presence during resuscitation on patient outcomes, family and provider outcomes and perceptions.
PubMed: 36087636
DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2022.08.021 -
BMC Health Services Research Oct 2021Accreditation is viewed as a reputable tool to evaluate and enhance the quality of health care. However, its effect on performance and outcomes remains unclear. This...
BACKGROUND
Accreditation is viewed as a reputable tool to evaluate and enhance the quality of health care. However, its effect on performance and outcomes remains unclear. This review aimed to identify and analyze the evidence on the impact of hospital accreditation.
METHODS
We systematically searched electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, MEDLINE (OvidSP), CDSR, CENTRAL, ScienceDirect, SSCI, RSCI, SciELO, and KCI) and other sources using relevant subject headings. We included peer-reviewed quantitative studies published over the last two decades, irrespective of its design or language. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, two reviewers independently screened initially identified articles, reviewed the full-text of potentially relevant studies, extracted necessary data, and assessed the methodological quality of the included studies using a validated tool. The accreditation effects were synthesized and categorized thematically into six impact themes.
RESULTS
We screened a total of 17,830 studies, of which 76 empirical studies that examined the impact of accreditation met our inclusion criteria. These studies were methodologically heterogeneous. Apart from the effect of accreditation on healthcare workers and particularly on job stress, our results indicate a consistent positive effect of hospital accreditation on safety culture, process-related performance measures, efficiency, and the patient length of stay, whereas employee satisfaction, patient satisfaction and experience, and 30-day hospital readmission rate were found to be unrelated to accreditation. Paradoxical results regarding the impact of accreditation on mortality rate and healthcare-associated infections hampered drawing firm conclusions on these outcome measures.
CONCLUSION
There is reasonable evidence to support the notion that compliance with accreditation standards has multiple plausible benefits in improving the performance in the hospital setting. Despite inconclusive evidence on causality, introducing hospital accreditation schemes stimulates performance improvement and patient safety. Efforts to incentivize and modernize accreditation are recommended to move towards institutionalization and sustaining the performance gains. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020167863.
Topics: Accreditation; Health Personnel; Hospitals; Humans; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Patient Satisfaction
PubMed: 34610823
DOI: 10.1186/s12913-021-07097-6 -
Journal of General Internal Medicine Oct 2019Computerized physician order entry and clinical decision support systems are electronic prescribing strategies that are increasingly used to improve patient safety.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Computerized physician order entry and clinical decision support systems are electronic prescribing strategies that are increasingly used to improve patient safety. Previous reviews show limited effect on patient outcomes. Our objective was to assess the impact of electronic prescribing strategies on medication errors and patient harm in hospitalized patients.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and CINAHL were searched from January 2007 to January 2018. We included prospective studies that compared hospital-based electronic prescribing strategies with control, and reported on medication error or patient harm. Data were abstracted by two reviewers and pooled using random effects model. Study quality was assessed using the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care and evidence quality was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.
RESULTS
Thirty-eight studies were included; comprised of 11 randomized control trials and 27 non-randomized interventional studies. Electronic prescribing strategies reduced medication errors (RR 0.24 (95% CI 0.13, 0.46), I 98%, n = 11) and dosing errors (RR 0.17 (95% CI 0.08, 0.38), I 96%, n = 9), with both risk ratios significantly affected by advancing year of publication. There was a significant effect of electronic prescribing strategies on adverse drug events (ADEs) (RR 0.52 (95% CI 0.40, 0.68), I 0%, n = 2), but not on preventable ADEs (RR 0.55 (95% CI 0.30, 1.01), I 78%, n = 3), hypoglycemia (RR 1.03 (95% CI 0.62-1.70), I 28%, n = 7), length of stay (MD - 0.18 (95% - 1.42, 1.05), I 94%, n = 7), or mortality (RR 0.97 (95% CI 0.79, 1.19), I 74%, n = 9). The quality of evidence was rated very low.
DISCUSSION
Electronic prescribing strategies decrease medication errors and adverse drug events, but had no effect on other patient outcomes. Conservative interpretations of these findings are supported by significant heterogeneity and the preponderance of low-quality studies.
Topics: Decision Support Systems, Clinical; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Electronic Prescribing; Humans; Medication Errors; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31396810
DOI: 10.1007/s11606-019-05236-8 -
Journal of Vascular Surgery Apr 2020Multiple single-center studies have reported significant reductions in major amputations among patients with diabetic foot ulcers after initiation of multidisciplinary...
OBJECTIVE
Multiple single-center studies have reported significant reductions in major amputations among patients with diabetic foot ulcers after initiation of multidisciplinary teams. The purpose of this study was to assess the association between multidisciplinary teams (ie, two or more types of clinicians working together) and the risk of major amputation and to compile descriptions of these diverse teams.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception through May 24, 2019 for studies reporting the association between multidisciplinary teams and major amputation rates for patients with diabetic foot ulcers. We included original studies if ≥50% of the patients seen by the multidisciplinary team had diabetes, they included a control group, and they reported the effect of a multidisciplinary team on major amputation rates. Studies were excluded if they were non-English language, abstracts only, or unpublished. We used the five-domain Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety Model to describe team composition and function and summarized changes in major amputation rates associated with multidisciplinary team care. A meta-analysis was not performed because of heterogeneity across studies, their observational designs, and the potential for uncontrolled confounding (PROSPERO No. 2017: CRD42017067915).
RESULTS
We included 33 studies, none of which were randomized trials. Multidisciplinary team composition and functions were highly diverse. However, four elements were common across teams: teams were composed of medical and surgical disciplines; larger teams benefitted from having a "captain" and a nuclear and ancillary team member structure; clear referral pathways and care algorithms supported timely, comprehensive care; and multidisciplinary teams addressed four key tasks: glycemic control, local wound management, vascular disease, and infection. Ninety-four percent (31/33) of studies reported a reduction in major amputations after institution of a multidisciplinary team.
CONCLUSIONS
Multidisciplinary team composition was variable but reduced major amputations in 94% of studies. Teams consistently addressed glycemic control, local wound management, vascular disease, and infection in a timely and coordinated manner to reduce major amputation for patients with diabetic foot ulcerations. Care algorithms and referral pathways were key tools to their success.
Topics: Amputation, Surgical; Diabetic Foot; Humans; Limb Salvage; Patient Care Team
PubMed: 31676181
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.08.244 -
BMJ Open Dec 2021To characterise the extent to which health professionals perform SBAR (situation, background, assessment, recommendation) as intended (ie, with high fidelity) and the...
OBJECTIVE
To characterise the extent to which health professionals perform SBAR (situation, background, assessment, recommendation) as intended (ie, with high fidelity) and the extent to which its use improves communication clarity or other quality measures.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Healthstar, PsycINFO, Embase and CINAHL to October 2020 and handsearching selected journals.
STUDY SELECTION AND OUTCOME MEASURES
Eligible studies consisted of controlled trials and time series, including simple before-after design, assessing SBAR implementation fidelity or the effects of SBAR on communication clarity or other quality measures (eg, safety climate, patient outcomes).
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two reviewers independently abstracted data according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses on study features, intervention details and study outcomes. We characterised the magnitude of improvement in outcomes as small (<20% relative increase), moderate (20%-40%) or large (>40%).
RESULTS
Twenty-eight studies (3 randomised controlled trials, 6 controlled before-after studies, and 19 uncontrolled before-after studies) met inclusion criteria. Of the nine studies assessing fidelity of SBAR use, four occurred in classroom settings and three of these studies reported large improvements. The five studies assessing fidelity in clinical settings reported small to moderate effects. Among eight studies measuring communication clarity, only three reported large improvements and two of these occurred in classroom settings. Among the 17 studies reporting impacts on quality measures beyond communication, over half reported moderate to large improvements. These improvements tended to involve measures of teamwork and culture. Improvements in patient outcomes occurred only with intensive multifaceted interventions (eg, early warning scores and rapid response systems).
CONCLUSIONS
High fidelity uptake of SBAR and improvements in communication clarity occurred predominantly in classroom studies. Studies in clinical settings achieving impacts beyond communication typically involved broader, multifaceted interventions. Future efforts to improve communication using SBAR should first confirm high fidelity uptake in clinical settings rather than assuming this has occurred.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42018111377.
Topics: Communication; Controlled Before-After Studies; Health Personnel; Humans
PubMed: 34921087
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055247 -
Inquiry : a Journal of Medical Care... 2023Nursing leadership is critical in facilitating and improving nurse performance, which is essential for providing quality care and ensuring patient safety. The aim of...
Nursing leadership is critical in facilitating and improving nurse performance, which is essential for providing quality care and ensuring patient safety. The aim of this study is to explore the relationship between nursing leadership and nurse performance by understanding the leadership behaviors and factors that motivate nurses to perform well. To study the factors that nurses believe motivate them to perform better, a systematic review was undertaken, correlating these factors to leadership behaviors/styles. The PRISMA guidelines were followed to identify relevant articles. After applying the selection criteria, 11 articles were included in the final analysis. Overall, 51 elements that influence nurses' motivation to perform better were found and categorized into 6 categories, including autonomy, competencies, relatedness, individual nursing characteristics, relationships and support, and leadership styles/practices. It has been discovered that both direct and indirect nursing leadership behaviors affect nurses' performance. A better understanding of the factors that motivate nurses to perform well and facilitating them in the work environment through leadership behaviors/styles can improve nurses' performance. There is a need to increase research on nurse leadership and nurses' performance in the current innovative and technologically integrated work environment to identify new factors of influence.
Topics: Humans; Nursing Staff; Leadership; Motivation; Quality of Health Care; Job Satisfaction
PubMed: 37269099
DOI: 10.1177/00469580231178528 -
Human Resources For Health Jan 2020A high variety of team interventions aims to improve team performance outcomes. In 2008, we conducted a systematic review to provide an overview of the scientific...
BACKGROUND
A high variety of team interventions aims to improve team performance outcomes. In 2008, we conducted a systematic review to provide an overview of the scientific studies focused on these interventions. However, over the past decade, the literature on team interventions has rapidly evolved. An updated overview is therefore required, and it will focus on all possible team interventions without restrictions to a type of intervention, setting, or research design.
OBJECTIVES
To review the literature from the past decade on interventions with the goal of improving team effectiveness within healthcare organizations and identify the "evidence base" levels of the research.
METHODS
Seven major databases were systematically searched for relevant articles published between 2008 and July 2018. Of the original search yield of 6025 studies, 297 studies met the inclusion criteria according to three independent authors and were subsequently included for analysis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Scale was used to assess the level of empirical evidence.
RESULTS
Three types of interventions were distinguished: (1) Training, which is sub-divided into training that is based on predefined principles (i.e. CRM: crew resource management and TeamSTEPPS: Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety), on a specific method (i.e. simulation), or on general team training. (2) Tools covers tools that structure (i.e. SBAR: Situation, Background, Assessment, and Recommendation, (de)briefing checklists, and rounds), facilitate (through communication technology), or trigger (through monitoring and feedback) teamwork. (3) Organizational (re)design is about (re)designing structures to stimulate team processes and team functioning. (4) A programme is a combination of the previous types. The majority of studies evaluated a training focused on the (acute) hospital care setting. Most of the evaluated interventions focused on improving non-technical skills and provided evidence of improvements.
CONCLUSION
Over the last decade, the number of studies on team interventions has increased exponentially. At the same time, research tends to focus on certain interventions, settings, and/or outcomes. Principle-based training (i.e. CRM and TeamSTEPPS) and simulation-based training seem to provide the greatest opportunities for reaching the improvement goals in team functioning.
Topics: Delivery of Health Care; Humans; Patient Care Team; Quality Improvement
PubMed: 31915007
DOI: 10.1186/s12960-019-0411-3 -
Journal of Psychiatric and Mental... Aug 2020WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Aggressive behaviour is a major problem in clinical practice of mental health care and can result in the use of coercive measures....
WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Aggressive behaviour is a major problem in clinical practice of mental health care and can result in the use of coercive measures. Coercive measures are dangerous for psychiatric patients and international mental healthcare works on the elimination of these interventions. There is no previous review that summarizes the attitude of nursing staff towards coercive measures and the influence of nursing staff characteristics on attitude towards and the use of coercive measures. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: The attitude of nurses shifted from a therapeutic paradigm (coercive measures have positive effects on patients) to a safety paradigm (coercive measures are undesirable, but necessary for the wards' safety). Nurses express the need for less coercive interventions to prevent seclusion and restraint, but their perception of intrusiveness is influenced by how often they use specific coercive measures. The knowledge from scientific literature on the influence of nursing staff on coercive measures is highly inconclusive, although the feeling of safety of nurses might prove to be promising for further research. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: There is need for increased attention specifically for the feeling of safety of nurses, to better equip nurses for their difficult work on acute mental health wards. ABSTRACT: Introduction The use of coercive measures generally has negative effects on patients. To help prevent its use, professionals need insight into what nurses believe about coercion and which staff determinants may influence its application. There is need for an integrated review on both attitude and influence of nurses on the use of coercion. Aim To summarize literature concerning attitude of nurses towards coercive measures and the influence of staff characteristics on the use of coercive measures. Method Systematic review. Results The attitude of nurses changed during the last two decades from a therapeutic to a safety paradigm. Nurses currently view coercive measures as undesirable, but necessary to deal with aggression. Nurses express the need for less intrusive interventions, although familiarity probably influences its perceived intrusiveness. Literature on the relation between staff characteristics and coercive measures is inconclusive. Discussion Nurses perceive coercive measures as unwanted but still necessary to maintain safety on psychiatric wards. Focussing on the determinants of perception of safety might be a promising direction for future research. Implications for practice Mental health care could improve the focus on the constructs of perceived safety and familiarity with alternative interventions to protect patients from unnecessary use of coercive interventions.
Topics: Attitude of Health Personnel; Coercion; Humans; Mental Disorders; Nursing Staff, Hospital; Patient Safety; Psychiatric Department, Hospital; Psychiatric Nursing; Restraint, Physical; Violence
PubMed: 31876970
DOI: 10.1111/jpm.12586 -
Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology... 2022Patient safety is a concept of great importance to managers, health professionals, and patients and their families, given patient safety promotes more effective care and... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE
Patient safety is a concept of great importance to managers, health professionals, and patients and their families, given patient safety promotes more effective care and reduces costs. Moreover, while analyzing the area of anesthesiology, one can realize the epidemiological changes, increased complexity and number of procedures, and the adoption of a new matrix of essential skills mandatory for residents of anesthesiology in Brazil. Thus, it is relevant to identify current patient safety competences among anesthesiology residents.
METHODS
A systematic review was elaborated using PubMed, SciELO, BVS, Cochrane Library, LILACS and CAPES databases with the descriptors "anesthesiology", "patient safety", "residency" and "competence".
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
Thirteen articles published in the past 10 years were analyzed. The articles depicted competences grouped into three categories: knowledge (identification, prevention and management of adverse events; use of correct and up-to-date information; understanding of human factors; and continuous learning), skills (efficient communication; teamwork; leadership; decision-making; and self-confidence), and attitude (management of stress and fatigue; and infection control). All these skills can be developed and assessed through simulation and active learning methods, profiting from a multidisciplinary approach. Studies also reveal that residents perform poorly in certain patient safety domains due to lack of effective in-depth understanding, appreciation of the topic and ineffective teaching. As a result, greater investment in the topic is needed by teaching and health institutions and researchers.
Topics: Anesthesiology; Brazil; Clinical Competence; Humans; Internship and Residency; Patient Safety
PubMed: 35124107
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjane.2021.06.029