Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21824420›Full record

ArticleCritical care (London, England)2011

Managing daily intensive care activities: an observational study concerning ad hoc decision making of charge nurses and intensivists.

Heljä Lundgrén-Laine, Elina Kontio, Juha Perttilä, Heikki Korvenranta, Jari Forsström, Sanna Salanterä

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care (London, England), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Association of Sociodemographic Factors With Overtriage, Undertriage, and Value of Care After Major Surgery.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Year in review 2011: Critical Care--Resource management.Critical care (London, England) · 2012
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Heljä Lundgrén-LaineDepartment of Nursing Science, University of Turku, Lemminkäisenkatu 1, FI-20014 Turku, Finland. hklula@utu.fi
Elina Kontio
Juha Perttilä
Heikki Korvenranta
Jari Forsström
Sanna Salanterä

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionManagement of daily activities in ICUs is challenging. ICU shift leaders, charge nurses and intensivists have to make several immediate ad hoc decisions to enable the fluent flow of ICU activities. Even though the management of ICU activities is quite well delineated by international consensus guidelines, we know only a little about the content of the real clinical decision making of ICU shift leaders.

methodsWe conducted an observational study with the think-aloud technique to describe the ad hoc decision making of ICU shift leaders. The study was performed in two university-affiliated hospital ICUs. Twelve charge nurses and eight intensivists were recruited. Observations were recorded and transcribed for qualitative content analysis using the protocol analysis method. The software program NVivo 7 was used to manage the data. The interrater agreement was assessed with percentages and by Cohen's κ.

resultsWe identified 463 ad hoc decisions made by the charge nurses and 444 made by the intensivists. During our data collection time, this breaks down to over 230 immediately made decisions per day (24 hours). We divided the ad hoc decision making of ICU shift leaders into two types: process-focused and situation-focused. Process-focused decision making included more permanent information, such as human resources, know-how and material resources, whereas situation-focused decision making included decisions about single events, such as patient admission. We named eight different categories for ICU ad hoc decision making: (1) adverse events, (2) diagnostics, (3) human resources and know-how, (4) material resources, (5) patient admission, (6) patient discharge, (7) patient information and vital signs and (8) special treatments.

conclusionsICU shift leaders make a great number of complex ad hoc decisions throughout the day. Often this decision making involves both intensivists and charge nurses. It forms a bundle that requires versatile, immediate information for a successful outcome. In the future, we need to investigate which information is crucial for ad hoc decision making. These challenges should also be emphasised when information technology programs for ICU care management are developed.

Indexed as

Decision MakingHospitalistsNursing Staff, HospitalContinuity of Patient CareDisclosureFemaleFinlandHospitals, UniversityHumansIntensive Care UnitsMalePersonnel Staffing and SchedulingThinking

Identifiers

PMID21824420
PMCPMC3387631

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.