Interprofessional Rounds Research Articles

Cross-Disciplinary Perceptions of Structured Interprofessional Rounds in Promoting Teamwork Within an Academic Tertiary Care Obstetric Unit.

In 2005, physician and nursing leaders at Brigham and Women's Hospital initiated structured interprofessional rounds (SIPRs) on the labor and delivery (L&D) suite to improve team communication. We performed a cross-sectional analysis of providers' perceptions of SIPRs and their effectiveness in improving teamwork. We hypothesized that on average, providers would perceive SIPRs as being effective in promoting teamwork, but ratings would differ among professional groups. After a factor analysis and internal consistency assessment, a 19-item paper-based questionnaire was used to evaluate providers' perceptions using a 5-point Likert scale. Respondents included L&D nurses, midwives, obstetricians, and anesthesiologists who participate in SIPRs. The primary aim was to evaluate the providers' perceptions of SIPRs and their association with professional roles. The outcome was total response score for each provider, ranging from 19 to 95; perception of SIPRs as being effective in promoting teamwork was defined as having a total response score of >66.5 (mean score, >3.5 per question). A univariable linear regression model was performed, followed by a multivariable analysis adjusting for predictors that modified the outcome; predictors included years of professional practice, years of experience on the L&D suite, number of clinical work hours worked weekly, and principal shift assignment among nurses. The associations between these predictors and providers' perceptions were assessed as a secondary aim. A total of 234 practitioners responded (100% response rate). The mean total response score (SD) for all providers was 73.3 (9.5). After multivariable adjustment, the mean total response scores were significantly higher for obstetric providers than for anesthesia (Δ mean, 6.5, 95% CI, 0.3, 12.7 P = .036) and midwifery (Δ mean, 12.5, 95% CI, 2.0, 23.0, P = .009) providers. Providers scored significantly lower if they worked >60 clinical hours per week compared with ≤20 (Δ mean, -13.7, 95% CI, -25.3, -2.1, P = .009), 21-40 (Δ mean, -8.0, 95% CI, -15.8, -0.09, P = .049), or 41-60 hours (Δ mean, -8.1, 95% CI, -14.5, -1.7, P = .004). Duration of practice in professional role and experience on the L&D suite were not predictive of SIPRs ratings. On average, providers on the L&D suite perceive SIPRs as being effective in promoting teamwork. Perception ratings were significantly influenced by professional role and number of clinical hours worked weekly, suggesting that these factors should be explored in future research to minimize perception gaps and support a dynamic culture of interprofessional collaboration.

A case study of healthcare providers’ goals during interprofessional rounds

ABSTRACTDaily interprofessional rounds enhance collaboration among healthcare providers and improve hospital performance measures. However, it is unclear how healthcare providers’ goals influence the processes and outcomes of interprofessional rounds. The purpose of this case study was to explore the goals of healthcare providers attending interprofessional rounds in an internal medicine ward. The second purpose was to explore the challenges encountered by healthcare providers while pursuing these goals. Three focus groups were held with healthcare providers of diverse professional backgrounds. Focus group field notes and transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. The data indicated that there was no consensus among healthcare providers regarding the goals of interprofessional rounds. Discharge planning and patient care delivery were perceived as competing priorities during rounds, which limited the participation of healthcare providers. Nevertheless, study participants identified goals of rounds that were relevant to most care providers: developing shared perspectives of patients through direct communication, promoting collaborative decision making, coordinating care, and strengthening interprofessional relationships. Challenges in achieving the goals of interprofessional rounds included inconsistent attendance, exchange of irrelevant information, variable participation by healthcare providers, and inconsistent leadership. The findings of this study underscore the importance of shared goals in the context of interprofessional rounding.

Interprofessional Clinical Rounding: Effects on Processes and Outcomes of Care.

Communication breakdown is viewed as a significant contributor to preventable patient harm. Interprofessional rounding (IPR) is one method of communication supporting the evidenced-based care delivery. The purpose of this paper is to explore the benefits of IPR for patients, clinicians, and the healthcare system. Interprofessional rounding supports collaboration, discussion, and timely intervention to prevent miscommunication leading to adverse patient events. Adherence to evidence-based care suggests a positive impact on patient, process, and financial outcomes. Statistically significant IPR-related improvements are seen in reducing mortality, lengths of stay, medication errors, and hospitalization costs as well as improved staff and patient satisfaction. One IPR-related gap in the literature is integrative care delivery, a strategy that provides a unified plan to meet the complex needs of patients and produce optimal outcomes. Activation and standardization with active participation in IPR support a collaborative integration of care. Embracing IPR and advocating for collaboration across the care continuum is a crucial process in preventing adverse events. Integrated care delivery through IPR provides a unified plan to meet the complex needs of patients, prevent harm, and produce best possible outcomes.

Bedside Interprofessional Rounding: The View From the Patient's Side of the Bed.

Background:Bedside interprofessional rounding is gaining ground as a means to improve collaboration and patient outcomes, yet little is known regarding patients’ perceptions of the practice.Methods:This descriptive study used individual patient interviews to elicit views on interprofessional rounding from 35 patients at a large, urban hospital.Results:The findings identified three major categories: 1) about the rounding process; 2) clinical information; and 3) the impact/value of bedside inter-professional rounding.Discussion:Intentionally eliciting and responding to our patients’ views of interprofessional rounding may help us design methods that are patient centered and effective.

Accuracy of Laboratory Data Communication on ICU Daily Rounds Using an Electronic Health Record.

Accurately communicating patient data during daily ICU rounds is critically important since data provide the basis for clinical decision making. Despite its importance, high fidelity data communication during interprofessional ICU rounds is assumed, yet unproven. We created a robust but simple methodology to measure the prevalence of inaccurately communicated (misrepresented) data and to characterize data communication failures by type. We also assessed how commonly the rounding team detected data misrepresentation and whether data communication was impacted by environmental, human, and workflow factors. Direct observation of verbalized laboratory data during daily ICU rounds compared with data within the electronic health record and on presenters' paper prerounding notes. Twenty-six-bed academic medical ICU with a well-established electronic health record. ICU rounds presenter (medical student or resident physician), interprofessional rounding team. None. During 301 observed patient presentations including 4,945 audited laboratory results, presenters used a paper prerounding tool for 94.3% of presentations but tools contained only 78% of available electronic health record laboratory data. Ninty-six percent of patient presentations included at least one laboratory misrepresentation (mean, 6.3 per patient) and 38.9% of all audited laboratory data were inaccurately communicated. Most misrepresentation events were omissions. Only 7.8% of all laboratory misrepresentations were detected. Despite a structured interprofessional rounding script and a well-established electronic health record, clinician laboratory data retrieval and communication during ICU rounds at our institution was poor, prone to omissions and inaccuracies, yet largely unrecognized by the rounding team. This highlights an important patient safety issue that is likely widely prevalent, yet underrecognized.

Interprofessional education grand rounds

Interprofessional education grand rounds

Interprofessional Education in the Obstetrics and Gynecology Clerkship: Do We Teach Collaboration?

Local Mentor: Glenna Bett, PhD APGO Advisors: Jody Steinauer, MD, MAS, and Sonya Erickson, MD PURPOSE: To ascertain how obstetrics and gynecology (Ob-Gyn) clerkships incorporate interprofessional education (IPE) into the curriculum and Ob-Gyn clerkship directors' opinions regarding IPE. BACKGROUND: The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) identified IPE as a “horizon issue.” Literature review revealed 6 publications regarding IPE focused on the Ob-Gyn clerkship from the United States, Canada and United Kingdom. Most publications on IPE in Ob-Gyn investigated resident and attending perspectives. METHODS: The study used an online survey of Ob-Gyn clerkship directors at English-speaking LCME-accredited allopathic medical schools identified through the AAMC's website. Clerkship directors were identified through institutions' websites. The survey contained 16 questions about clerkship structure, if/how IPE activities are conducted, and clerkship director attitudes regarding IPE. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-four eligible medical schools were identified; 237 invitations were sent and 84 complete responses received. Seventy-two percent of clerkship directors believed that IPE should be included in the Ob-Gyn clerkship; 25% were unsure, and 4% did not. However, only 54% of Ob-Gyn clerkships incorporated IPE activities, 39% did not, and 7% planned to do so. The most common IPE activities were joint didactic sessions (58%) and interprofessional patient rounds (47%). The main barrier to implementing IPE was difficulty coordinating schedules (78%). DISCUSSION: The majority of respondents believed IPE should be included in the Ob-Gyn clerkship and had already done so. This is the first study to address practices and attitudes regarding IPE in the Ob-Gyn clerkship, a strength being its broad reach across LCME-accredited institutions. Potential weaknesses include response biases.

Interprofessional collaborative care characteristics and the occurrence of bedside interprofessional rounds: a cross-sectional analysis.

BackgroundInterprofessional collaboration improves the quality of medical care, but integration into inpatient workflow has been limited. Identification of systems-based factors promoting or diminishing bedside interprofessional rounds (BIR), one method of interprofessional collaboration, is critical for potential improvements in collaboration in hospital settings. The objective of this study was to determine whether the percentage of bedside interprofessional rounds in 18 hospital-based clinical units is attributable to spatial, staffing, patient, or nursing perception characteristics.MethodsA prospective, cross-sectional assessment of data obtained from nursing audits in one large academic medical center on a sampling of hospitalized pediatric and adult patients in 18 units from November 2012 to October 2013 was performed. The primary outcome was the percentage of bedside interprofessional rounds, defined as encounters including one attending-level physician and a nurse discussing the case at the patient’s bedside. Logistic regression models were constructed with four covariate domains: (1) spatial characteristics (unit type, bed number, square feet per bed), (2) staffing characteristics (nurse-to-patient ratios, admitting services to unit), (3) patient-level characteristics (length of stay, severity of illness), and (4) nursing perceptions of collegiality, staffing, and use of rounding scripts.ResultsOf 29,173 patients assessed during 1241 audited unit-days, 21,493 patients received BIR (74 %, range 35-97 %). Factors independently associated with increased occurrence of bedside interprofessional rounds were: intensive care unit (odds ratio 9.63, [CI 5.30-17.42]), intermediate care unit (odds ratio 2.84, [CI 1.37-5.87]), hospital length of stay 5-7 days (odds ratio 1.89, [CI, 1.05-3.38]) and >7 days (odds ratio 2.27, [CI, 1.28-4.02]), use of rounding script (odds ratio 2.20, [CI 1.15-4.23]), and perceived provider/leadership support (odds ratio 3.25, [CI 1.83-5.77]).ConclusionsVariation of bedside interprofessional rounds was more attributable to unit type and perceived support rather than spatial or relationship characteristics amongst providers. Strategies for transforming the value of hospital care may require a reconfiguration of care delivery toward more integrated practice units.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1714-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Improving nurse-physician teamwork through interprofessional bedside rounding.

BackgroundTeamwork between physicians and nurses has a positive association with patient satisfaction and outcomes, but perceptions of physician–nurse teamwork are often suboptimal.ObjectiveTo improve nurse–physician teamwork in a general medicine inpatient teaching unit by increasing face-to-face communication through interprofessional bedside rounds.InterventionFrom July 2013 through October 2013, physicians (attendings and residents) and nurses from four general medicine teams in a single nursing unit participated in bedside rounding, which involved the inclusion of nurses in morning rounds with the medicine teams at the patients’ bedside. Based on stakeholder analysis and feedback, a checklist for key patient care issues was created and utilized during bedside rounds.AssessmentTo assess the effect of bedside rounding on nurse–physician teamwork, a survey of selected items from the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ) was administered to participants before and after the implementation of bedside rounds. The number of pages to the general medicine teams was also measured as a marker of physician–nurse communication.ResultsParticipation rate in bedside rounds across the four medicine teams was 58%. SAQ response rates for attendings, residents, and nurses were 36/36 (100%), 73/73 (100%), and 32/73 (44%) prior to implementation of bedside rounding and 36 attendings (100%), 72 residents (100%), and 14 (19%) nurses after the implementation of bedside rounding, respectively. Prior to bedside rounding, nurses provided lower teamwork ratings (percent agree) than residents and attendings on all SAQ items; but after the intervention, the difference remained significant only on SAQ item 2 (“In this clinical area, it is not difficult to speak up if I perceive a problem with patient care”, 64% for nurses vs 79% for residents vs 94% for attendings, P=0.02). Also, resident responses improved on SAQ item 1 (“Nurse input is well received in this area”, 62% vs 82%, P=0.01).ConclusionIncreasing face-to-face communication through interprofessional bedside rounding can improve the perceptions of nurse–physician teamwork, particularly among residents and nurses.

Students' Perceptions on an Interprofessional Ward Round Training - A Qualitative Pilot Study.

Introduction: Ward rounds are an essential activity for interprofessional teams in hospital settings and represent complex tasks requiring not only medical knowledge but also communication skills, clinical technical skills, patient management skills and team-work skills. The present study aimed to analyse final year students’, nurses’ as well as physiotherapists’ views on a simulation-based interprofessional ward round training.Methods: In two successive passes a total number of 29 final year students, nursing students and physiotherapy students (16 in the first run, 13 in the second) volunteered to participate in two standardized patient ward round scenarios: (1) patient with myocardial infarction, and (2) patient with poorly controlled diabetes. Views on the interprofessional ward round training were assessed using focus groups.Results: Focus group based feedback contained two main categories (A) ward round training benefits and (B) difficulties. Positive aspects enfolded course preparation, setting of the training, the involvement of the participants during training and the positive learning atmosphere. Difficulties were seen in the flawed atmosphere and realization of ward rounds in the daily clinical setting with respect to inter-professional aspects, and course benefit for the different professional groups.Conclusion: The presented inter-professional ward round training represents a well received and valuable model of interprofessional learning. Further research should assess its effectiveness, processes of interprofessional interplay and transfer into clinical practice.

Fostering interprofessional communication through case discussions and simulated ward rounds in nursing and medical education: A pilot project.

Background: Poor communication between physicians and nursing staff could result in inadequate interprofessional collaboration with negative effects on patient health. In order to ensure optimal health care for patients, it is important to strengthen interprofessional communication and collaboration between physicians and nurses during their education. Aim: The aim of this project is to foster communication for medical and nursing students through interprofessional case discussions and simulated ward rounds as a form of training.Method: In 2013-15 a total of 39 nursing students and 22 medical students participated in eight seminars, each covering case discussions and simulated ward rounds. The seminar was evaluated based on student assessment of the educational objectives.Results: Students who voluntarily signed up for the seminar profited from the interprofessional interaction and gathered positive experiences working in a team.Conclusion: Through practicing case discussions and ward rounds as a group, interprofessional communication could be fostered between medical and nursing students. Students took advantage of the opportunity to ask those from other profession questions and realized that interprofessional interaction can lead to improved health care.

Mapping clinical pharmacy practice in Swiss hospitals: a cross-sectional study

BackgroundClinical pharmacy activities developed significantly in the last decade. The extent and organisation of these activities in Switzerland remained unknown.ObjectivesTo map clinical pharmacy services (CPS) provided in Swiss hospitals and...

Barriers and Strategies for Early Mobilization of Patients in Intensive Care Units.

Early mobilization of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) is safe, feasible, and beneficial. However, implementation of early mobility as part of routine clinical care can be challenging. The objective of this review is to identify barriers to early mobilization and discuss strategies to overcome such barriers. Based on a literature search, we synthesize data from 40 studies reporting 28 unique barriers to early mobility, of which 14 (50%) were patient-related, 5 (18%) structural, 5 (18%) ICU cultural, and 4 (14%) process-related barriers. These barriers varied across ICUs and within disciplines, depending on the ICU patient population, setting, attitude, and ICU culture. To overcome the identified barriers, over 70 strategies were reported and are synthesized in this review, including: implementation of safety guidelines; use of mobility protocols; interprofessional training, education, and rounds; and involvement of physician champions. Systematic efforts to change ICU culture to prioritize early mobilization using an interprofessional approach and multiple targeted strategies are important components of successfully implementing early mobility in clinical practice.

Improving Outcomes for Infants with Single Ventricle Physiology through Standardized Feeding during the Interstage.

Congenital heart disease is identified as the most common birth defect with single ventricle physiology carrying the highest mortality. Staged surgical palliation is required for treatment, with mortality historically as high as 22% in the four- to six-month period from the first- to second-stage surgical palliation, known as the interstage. A standardized postoperative feeding approach was implemented through an evidence-based protocol, parent engagement, and interprofessional team rounds. Five infants with single ventricle physiology preprotocol were compared with five infants who received the standardized feeding approach. Mann-Whitney U tests were conducted to evaluate the hypotheses that infants in the intervention condition would consume more calories and have a positive change in weight-to-age z-score (WAZ) and shorter length of stay (LOS) following the first and second surgeries compared to infants in the control condition. After the protocol, the change in WAZ during the interstage increased by virtually one standard deviation from 0.05 to 0.91. Median LOS dropped 32% after the first surgery and 43% after the second surgery. Since first- and second-stage palliative surgeries occur within the same year of life, this represents savings of $500,000 to $800,000 per year in a 10-infant model. The standardized feeding approach improved growth in single ventricle infants while concurrently lowering hospital costs.

Interprofessional rhetoric and operational realities: an ethnographic study of rounds in four intensive care units.

Morning interprofessional rounds (MIRs) are used in critical care medicine to improve team-based care and patient outcomes. Given existing evidence of conflict between and dissatisfaction among rounds participants, this study sought to better understand how the operational realities of care delivery in the intensive care unit (ICU) impact the success of MIRs. We conducted a year-long comparative ethnographic study of interprofessional collaboration and patient and family involvement in four ICUs in tertiary academic hospitals in two American cities. The study included 576h of observation of team interactions, 47 shadowing sessions and 40 clinician interviews. In line with best practices in ethnographic research, data collection and analysis were done iteratively using the constant comparative method. Member check was conducted regularly throughout the project. MIRs were implemented on all units with the explicit goals of improving team-based and patient-centered care. Operational conditions on the units, despite interprofessional commitment and engagement, appeared to thwart ICU teams from achieving these goals. Specifically, time constraints, struggles over space, and conflicts between MIRs' educational and care-plan-development functions all prevented teams from achieving collaboration and patient-involvement. Moreover, physicians' de facto control of rounds often meant that they resembled medical rounds (their historical predecessors), and sidelined other providers' contributions. This study suggests that the MIRs model, as presently practiced, might not be well suited to the provision of team-based, patient-centered care. In the interest of interprofessional collaboration, of the optimization of clinicians' time, of high-quality medical education and of patient-centered care, further research on interprofessional rounds models is needed.

A Survey of Rounding Practices in Canadian Adult Intensive Care Units.

ObjectiveTo describe rounding practices in Canadian adult Intensive Care Units (ICU) and identify opportunities for improvement.DesignMixed methods design. Cross sectional survey of Canadian Adult ICUs (n = 180) with purposefully sampled follow-up interviews (n = 7).Measurements and Main ResultsMedical directors representing 111 ICUs (62%) participated in the survey. Rounding practices varied across ICUs with the majority reporting the use of interprofessional rounds (81%) that employed an open (94%) and collaborative (86%) approach, occurred at the patient’s bedside (82%), and started at a standard time (79%) and standard location (56%). Most participants reported that patients (83%) and family members (67%) were welcome to attend rounds. Approximately half of ICUs (48%) used tools to facilitate rounds. Interruptions during rounds were reported to be common (i.e., ≥1 interruption for ≥50% of patients) in 46% of ICUs. Four themes were identified from qualitative analysis of participant responses to open-ended survey questions and interviews: multidisciplinarity, patient and family involvement, factors influencing productivity, and teaching and learning.ConclusionsThere is considerable variation in current rounding practices in Canadian medical/surgical ICUs. Opportunities exist to improve ICU rounds including ensuring the engagement of essential participants, clearly defining participant roles, establishing a standardized approach to the rounding process, minimizing interruptions, modifying the role of teaching, utilizing a structured rounding tool, and developing a metric for measuring rounding quality.

Effect of patient-centred bedside rounds on hospitalised patients’ decision control, activation and satisfaction with care

ImportanceThough interprofessional bedside rounds have been promoted to enhance patient-centred care for hospitalised patients, few studies have been conducted in adult hospital settings and evidence of impact is lacking.ObjectiveTo evaluate...

English

Effective discharge planning is important to ensuring a high quality of patient care and operational efficiency. The general internal medicine (GIM) environment is very complex and fluid, with multiple health professions providing care for patients. This makes coordination of discharges difficult, even with structured daily interprofessional rounds. The purpose of this case-control study was to evaluate a discharge notification form that predicts next-day discharges. The main measures of the study, which took place in GIM wards at two academic teaching hospitals, were the completion and accuracy of the discharge forms, length of stay, discharge times, post-discharge admissions, and emergency department visits. Seventy-six of 200 patients studied had information completed on the discharge notification form. The overall effect appeared to move discharges earlier in the day, while having no effect on length of stay. Patients whose information was completed on the discharge notification form were less likely to have an emergency department visit within 30 days post-discharge. The use of a discharge notification form appears to move discharges earlier in the day, without increasing length of stay. Further refinement and evaluation is necessary to increase usage and assess the impact on outcomes of care.

Medical Residents and Interprofessional Interactions in Discharge: An Ethnographic Exploration of Factors That Affect Negotiation

Interprofessional collaboration is an important aspect of patient discharge from a general internal medicine (GIM) unit. However, there has been minimal empirical or theoretical research that has examined interactions that occur between medical residents and other healthcare professionals in the discharge process. This study provides insight into the social processes that shape and characterize such interactions. To explore factors that shape interactions between medical residents and other healthcare professionals in relation to patient discharge, and to examine the opportunities for negotiations about discharge between these professional groups. A qualitative ethnographic approach using observations, interviews and documentary analysis. Healthcare professionals working in a GIM unit in Canada. Sixty-five hours of observations were undertaken in a range of settings (e.g. interprofessional rounds, medical and nursing rounds, nursing station) in the unit over a 17-month period. A maximum variation sampling approach was used to identify healthcare professionals working in the unit. Twenty-three interviews were completed, recorded and transcribed verbatim. A directed content approach using theories of medical dominance and negotiated order was used to analyze the data. The organization of clinical work in combination with clinical teaching influenced interprofessional interactions and the quality of discharge in this GIM unit. While organizational activities (orientation and rounds) and individual activities (e.g. role modeling, teaching) supported negotiations between medical residents and other healthcare professionals around discharge, participants had varied perspectives about their effectiveness. This study illuminates social factors and processes that require attention in order to address challenges with interprofessional collaboration and discharge in GIM. These findings have implications for medical education, workplace learning, patient safety and quality improvement.

Development of clinical pharmacy key performance indicators for hospital pharmacists using a modified Delphi approach.

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are quantifiable measures of quality. There are no published, systematically derived clinical pharmacy KPIs (cpKPIs). A group of hospital pharmacists aimed to develop national cpKPIs to advance clinical pharmacy practice and improve patient care. A cpKPI working group established a cpKPI definition, 8 evidence-derived cpKPI critical activity areas, 26 candidate cpKPIs, and 11 cpKPI ideal attributes in addition to 1 overall consensus criterion. Twenty-six clinical pharmacists and hospital pharmacy leaders participated in an internet-based 3-round modified Delphi survey. Panelists rated 26 candidate cpKPIs using 11 cpKPI ideal attributes and 1 overall consensus criterion on a 9-point Likert scale. A meeting was facilitated between rounds 2 and 3 to debate the merits and wording of candidate cpKPIs. Consensus was reached if 75% or more of panelists assigned a score of 7 to 9 on the consensus criterion during the third Delphi round. All panelists completed the 3 Delphi rounds, and 25/26 (96%) attended the meeting. Eight candidate cpKPIs met the consensus definition: (1) performing admission medication reconciliation (including best-possible medication history), (2) participating in interprofessional patient care rounds, (3) completing pharmaceutical care plans, (4) resolving drug therapy problems, (5) providing in-person disease and medication education to patients, (6) providing discharge patient medication education, (7) performing discharge medication reconciliation, and (8) providing bundled, proactive direct patient care activities. A Delphi panel of hospital pharmacists was successful in determining 8 consensus cpKPIs. Measurement and assessment of these cpKPIs will serve to advance clinical pharmacy practice and improve patient care.