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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Heip, Tine, Van Hecke, Ann, Malfait, Simon, Van Biesen, Wim, Eeckloo, Kristof
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