ArticlePediatrics2022
Using Quality Improvement Science to Promote Reliable Communication During Family-Centered Rounds.
Article in Pediatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Optimizing ward rounds: systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions to enhance patient safety.The British journal of surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Differential Impact of Virtual Family-Centered Rounds in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit by Social Factors: A Post Hoc Subgroup Analysis.Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association · 2024Trial
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
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesFamily-centered rounds (FCR) can lead to improved communication, satisfaction, and care delivery. However, FCR are variable in practice. Our primary goal was to implement and sustain consistent communication practices during FCR (a subset of all rounds in which parents were present) for patients on a pediatric hospital medicine service. We aimed to achieve 80% reliability for the following FCR practices: (1) discussion of risk factors and prevention strategies for hospital-acquired conditions (HACs), (2) discussion of discharge planning, and (3) asking families for questions.
methodsResearch assistants observed FCR on a pediatric acute care unit at an academic medical center and recorded if the rounding team discussed HAC risk factors, discussed discharge, or asked families for questions. Using the Model for Improvement, we performed multiple plan-do-study-act cycles to test and implement interventions, including (1) standardized note templates, (2) education via peer-led group discussions and team e-mails, and (3) routine provider feedback about performance. Data were analyzed by using statistical process control charts.
resultsFrom October 2017 to April 2019, reliability increased to >80% and sustained for (1) discussion of HAC risk factors (increased from 11% to 89%), (2) discussion of discharge planning (from 60% to 92%), and (3) asking families for questions (from 61% to 87%). Peer-led physician education, reminder e-mails, and physician engagement were the most impactful interventions corresponding to centerline shifts.
conclusionsUsing multiple interventions, we achieved and sustained improvements in key communication-related elements of FCR. Future work will focus on determining if improved practices impact clinical outcomes.
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.