Cargando…
The Effects of Interdisciplinary Bedside Rounds on Patient Centeredness, Quality of Care, and Team Collaboration: A Systematic Review
BACKGROUND: Research indicates that having multiple healthcare professions and disciplines simultaneously at the patient’s bedside improves interprofessional communication and collaboration, coordination of care, and patient-centered shared decision-making. So far, no review has been conducted, whic...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8719516/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32398542 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000695 |
_version_ | 1784624950464741376 |
---|---|
author | Heip, Tine Van Hecke, Ann Malfait, Simon Van Biesen, Wim Eeckloo, Kristof |
author_facet | Heip, Tine Van Hecke, Ann Malfait, Simon Van Biesen, Wim Eeckloo, Kristof |
author_sort | Heip, Tine |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Research indicates that having multiple healthcare professions and disciplines simultaneously at the patient’s bedside improves interprofessional communication and collaboration, coordination of care, and patient-centered shared decision-making. So far, no review has been conducted, which included qualitative studies, explores the feasibility of the method, and looks at differences in definitions. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to explore available evidence on the effects of interdisciplinary bedside rounds (IBRs) on patient centeredness, quality of care and team collaboration; the feasibility of IBRs; and the differences in definitions. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched. The reference lists of included articles and gray literature were also screened. Articles in English, Dutch, and French were included. There were no exclusion criteria for publication age or study design. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: The included (N = 33) articles were critically reviewed and assessed with the Downs and Black checklist. The selection and summarizing of the articles were performed in a 3-step procedure, in which each step was performed by 2 researchers separately with researcher triangulation afterward. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Interdisciplinary bedside round has potentially a positive influence on patient centeredness, quality of care, and team collaboration, but because of a substantial variability in definitions, design, outcomes, reporting, and a low quality of evidence, definitive results stay uncertain. Perceived barriers to use IBR are time constraints, lack of shared goals, varied responsibilities of different providers, hierarchy, and coordination challenges. Future research should primarily focus on conceptualizing IBRs, in specific the involvement of patients, before more empiric, multicentered, and longitudinal research is conducted. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8719516 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87195162022-01-07 The Effects of Interdisciplinary Bedside Rounds on Patient Centeredness, Quality of Care, and Team Collaboration: A Systematic Review Heip, Tine Van Hecke, Ann Malfait, Simon Van Biesen, Wim Eeckloo, Kristof J Patient Saf Original Studies BACKGROUND: Research indicates that having multiple healthcare professions and disciplines simultaneously at the patient’s bedside improves interprofessional communication and collaboration, coordination of care, and patient-centered shared decision-making. So far, no review has been conducted, which included qualitative studies, explores the feasibility of the method, and looks at differences in definitions. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to explore available evidence on the effects of interdisciplinary bedside rounds (IBRs) on patient centeredness, quality of care and team collaboration; the feasibility of IBRs; and the differences in definitions. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched. The reference lists of included articles and gray literature were also screened. Articles in English, Dutch, and French were included. There were no exclusion criteria for publication age or study design. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: The included (N = 33) articles were critically reviewed and assessed with the Downs and Black checklist. The selection and summarizing of the articles were performed in a 3-step procedure, in which each step was performed by 2 researchers separately with researcher triangulation afterward. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Interdisciplinary bedside round has potentially a positive influence on patient centeredness, quality of care, and team collaboration, but because of a substantial variability in definitions, design, outcomes, reporting, and a low quality of evidence, definitive results stay uncertain. Perceived barriers to use IBR are time constraints, lack of shared goals, varied responsibilities of different providers, hierarchy, and coordination challenges. Future research should primarily focus on conceptualizing IBRs, in specific the involvement of patients, before more empiric, multicentered, and longitudinal research is conducted. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022-01 2020-05-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8719516/ /pubmed/32398542 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000695 Text en Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. |
spellingShingle | Original Studies Heip, Tine Van Hecke, Ann Malfait, Simon Van Biesen, Wim Eeckloo, Kristof The Effects of Interdisciplinary Bedside Rounds on Patient Centeredness, Quality of Care, and Team Collaboration: A Systematic Review |
title | The Effects of Interdisciplinary Bedside Rounds on Patient Centeredness, Quality of Care, and Team Collaboration: A Systematic Review |
title_full | The Effects of Interdisciplinary Bedside Rounds on Patient Centeredness, Quality of Care, and Team Collaboration: A Systematic Review |
title_fullStr | The Effects of Interdisciplinary Bedside Rounds on Patient Centeredness, Quality of Care, and Team Collaboration: A Systematic Review |
title_full_unstemmed | The Effects of Interdisciplinary Bedside Rounds on Patient Centeredness, Quality of Care, and Team Collaboration: A Systematic Review |
title_short | The Effects of Interdisciplinary Bedside Rounds on Patient Centeredness, Quality of Care, and Team Collaboration: A Systematic Review |
title_sort | effects of interdisciplinary bedside rounds on patient centeredness, quality of care, and team collaboration: a systematic review |
topic | Original Studies |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8719516/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32398542 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000695 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT heiptine theeffectsofinterdisciplinarybedsideroundsonpatientcenterednessqualityofcareandteamcollaborationasystematicreview AT vanheckeann theeffectsofinterdisciplinarybedsideroundsonpatientcenterednessqualityofcareandteamcollaborationasystematicreview AT malfaitsimon theeffectsofinterdisciplinarybedsideroundsonpatientcenterednessqualityofcareandteamcollaborationasystematicreview AT vanbiesenwim theeffectsofinterdisciplinarybedsideroundsonpatientcenterednessqualityofcareandteamcollaborationasystematicreview AT eecklookristof theeffectsofinterdisciplinarybedsideroundsonpatientcenterednessqualityofcareandteamcollaborationasystematicreview AT heiptine effectsofinterdisciplinarybedsideroundsonpatientcenterednessqualityofcareandteamcollaborationasystematicreview AT vanheckeann effectsofinterdisciplinarybedsideroundsonpatientcenterednessqualityofcareandteamcollaborationasystematicreview AT malfaitsimon effectsofinterdisciplinarybedsideroundsonpatientcenterednessqualityofcareandteamcollaborationasystematicreview AT vanbiesenwim effectsofinterdisciplinarybedsideroundsonpatientcenterednessqualityofcareandteamcollaborationasystematicreview AT eecklookristof effectsofinterdisciplinarybedsideroundsonpatientcenterednessqualityofcareandteamcollaborationasystematicreview |