Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28376872›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2017

Barriers and facilitators to improve safety and efficiency of the ICU discharge process: a mixed methods study.

Nelleke van Sluisveld, Anke Oerlemans, Gert Westert, Johannes Gerardus van der Hoeven, Hub Wollersheim, Marieke Zegers

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Factors Influencing the Decision-making of Healthcare Providers Regarding the Transition of Patients from the Intensive Care Unit to the General Ward in Iran: A Qualitative Study.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nelleke van SluisveldRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Nelleke.vansluisveld@radboudumc.nl.
Anke OerlemansRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Gert WestertRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Johannes Gerardus van der HoevenDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Hub WollersheimRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Marieke ZegersRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Radboud University Medical Center · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence indicates that suboptimal clinical handover from the intensive care unit (ICU) to general wards leads to unnecessary ICU readmissions and increased mortality. We aimed to gain insight into barriers and facilitators to implement and use ICU discharge practices.

methodsA mixed methods approach was conducted, using 1) 23 individual and four focus group interviews, with post-ICU patients, ICU managers, and nurses and physicians working in the ICU or general ward of ten Dutch hospitals, and 2) a questionnaire survey, which contained 27 statements derived from the interviews, and was completed by 166 ICU physicians (21.8%) from 64 Dutch hospitals (71.1% of the total of 90 Dutch hospitals).

resultsThe interviews resulted in 66 barriers and facilitators related to: the intervention (e.g., feasibility); the professional (e.g., attitude towards checklists); social factors (e.g., presence or absence of a culture of feedback); and the organisation (e.g., financial resources). A facilitator considered important by ICU physicians was a checklist to structure discharge communication (92.2%). Barriers deemed important were lack of a culture of feedback (55.4%), an absence of discharge criteria (23.5%), and an overestimation of the capabilities of general wards to care for complex patients by ICU physicians (74.7%).

conclusionsBased on the barriers and facilitators found in this study, improving handover communication, formulating specific discharge criteria, stimulating a culture of feedback, and preventing overestimation of the general ward are important to effectively improve the ICU discharge process.

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsQuality ImprovementAdultChecklistCritical CareFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsPatient DischargePatient HandoffPatient SafetyPatients' RoomsCritical careDischarge practicesIntensive careIntensive care unitMortalityPatient readmission

Identifiers

PMID28376872
PMCPMC5381117
OpenAlexW2604398369

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.