Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30949888›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of pediatrics2019

Humanization interventions in general pediatric wards: a systematic review.

Marina Tripodi, Maria Anna Siano, Claudia Mandato, Anna Giulia Elena De Anseris, Paolo Quitadamo, Salvatore Guercio Nuzio, Paolo Siani, Pietro Vajro

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of pediatrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The Development and Validation of the Healthcare Professional Humanization Scale (HUMAS) for Nursing.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    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

8 authors.

Marina TripodiDepartment of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry "Scuola Medica Salernitana", Pediatrics Section, University of Salerno, Via Allende, 84081, Baronissi, Salerno, Italy.
Maria Anna SianoDepartment of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry "Scuola Medica Salernitana", Pediatrics Section, University of Salerno, Via Allende, 84081, Baronissi, Salerno, Italy.
Claudia MandatoSystematic Pediatrics AORN "Santobono-Pausilipon", 80122 Naples, Italy.
Anna Giulia Elena De AnserisPediatrics/ClinicalPediatrics, University Hospital "San Giovanni di Dio e Ruggi d'Aragona", 84131 Salerno, Italy.
Paolo QuitadamoSystematic Pediatrics AORN "Santobono-Pausilipon", 80122 Naples, Italy.
Salvatore Guercio NuzioDepartment of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry "Scuola Medica Salernitana", Pediatrics Section, University of Salerno, Via Allende, 84081, Baronissi, Salerno, Italy.
Paolo SianiSystematic Pediatrics AORN "Santobono-Pausilipon", 80122 Naples, Italy.
Pietro VajroDepartment of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry "Scuola Medica Salernitana", Pediatrics Section, University of Salerno, Via Allende, 84081, Baronissi, Salerno, Italy. pvajro@unisa.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9418-5880

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Humanization of care (HOC) interventions have rarely been evaluated and compared. We systematically reviewed the outcomes of published interventions aimed to improve the HOC for hospitalized children. PubMed and Scopus were used as data sources. Studies published between January 1, 2000, and February 28, 2018, were considered eligible if they reported analysis of results vs. either a control group or baseline, or if they measured patient/family/staff satisfaction. Neonatal age, emergency departments, and subspecialty settings were excluded. Data were extracted using a standardized data extraction form including study design, sample size, intervention, outcome/objective, and evaluation of results or pre- post-intervention satisfaction. Twenty-eight of the 12,012 retrieved articles met the inclusion criteria. Most studies were of moderate to low quality. Only six studies were of high quality. Areas of interest dealt with environment (n = 4), provider-patient relationship (n = 6), pet therapy (n = 5), technology (n = 5), family-centered rounds (n = 2), psychological support (n = 3), and staff training (n = 3). The overall trend of the results indicated that interventions were mostly effective and likely to have beneficial effects on several aspects of pediatric hospitalization.Conclusions: Pending further studies of better research quality, the findings of this review may have policy and practice implications for planning HOC interventions by pediatric healthcare professionals. What is Known: • In pediatrics, humanization of care (HOC) provides assistance focused not only on the child as a patient, but on the whole family. • HOC programs have been developed, but information on the overall outcome of local projects aiming to improve in a practical way the hospital taking charge of pediatric patients is still lacking. What is New: • Local HOC interventions are mostly effective and have beneficial effects on several aspects of hospitalization in general pediatrics wards. • The findings of this review may have practice implications for planning HOC interventions by pediatric healthcare professionals.

Indexed as

Hospital UnitsChildFamilyHumansPatient-Centered CarePediatricsHumanization modelsHumanization of carePediatric carePediatric hospitalization

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.