ArticleMedical education online2019
Fostering self-determination of bedside providers to promote active participation in rapid response events.
Article in Medical education online, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWidespread implementation of rapid response (RR) systems positively impacts outcomes of clinically unstable hospitalized patients. Collaboration between bedside providers and specialized responding teams is crucial for effective functioning of RR system. Bedside, providers often harbor negative feelings about having to 'call for help' that could impact their active participation in RR.
objectiveThe objective of the study is to enhance active participation of bedside providers in RR by fostering self-determination through targeted education.
designNeeds assessment affirmed that bedside providers in our tertiary academic pediatric hospital felt loss of control over patient care, lack of competence, and disconnect from the RR team. We used the principles of autonomy, competence, and relatedness posited by the self-determination theory to guide the development, implementation, and evaluation of our educational program for bedside providers.
resultsForty-two bedside providers participated in our program. Participants reported significant improvement in RR-related clinical knowledge. More importantly, there was significant enhancement in individual perceptions of autonomy (pre-mean: 2.12, post-mean: 4.4) competence (pre-mean: 2.15, post-mean: 4.4), and relatedness (pre-mean: 2.65, post-mean: 4.5) with RR (p < 0.01). The evaluation results for overall educational effectiveness showed a mean score of 4.69 ± 0.79. All scores were based on a 5-point Likert scale of 1: poor to 5: excellent. Educators noted good participant engagement. The program's structure, evaluations, and data management were modified based on the feedback.
conclusionsWe successfully developed and implemented targeted educational program for bedside providers based on self-determination theory. The evaluations showed improvement in bedside providers' clinical RR knowledge and perceptions of autonomy, competence, and relatedness following the training.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.