Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36002846›Full record

ReviewSystematic reviews2022

How does nursing-sensitive indicator feedback with nursing or interprofessional teams work and shape nursing performance improvement systems? A rapid realist review.

Joachim Rapin, Joanie Pellet, Cédric Mabire, Sylvie Gendron, Carl-Ardy Dubois

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Systematic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors.

Joachim RapinFaculty of Nursing, Université de Montréal, 2375 Chemin de la Côte-Sainte-Catherine, Montréal, Québec, H3T 1A8, Canada. joachim.rapin@umontreal.ca.ORCID 0000-0001-6525-0957
Joanie PelletLausanne University Hospital, rue du Bugnon 21, CH - 1011, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Cédric MabireLausanne University Hospital, rue du Bugnon 21, CH - 1011, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Sylvie GendronFaculty of Nursing, Université de Montréal, 2375 Chemin de la Côte-Sainte-Catherine, Montréal, Québec, H3T 1A8, Canada.
Carl-Ardy DuboisÉcole de Santé Publique de L'Université de Montréal, 7101 Avenue du Parc, Montréal, Québec, H3N 1X9, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCare quality varies between organizations and even units within an organization. Inadequate care can have harmful financial and social consequences, e.g. nosocomial infection, lengthened hospital stays or death. Experts recommend the implementation of nursing performance improvement systems to assess team performance and monitor patient outcomes as well as service efficiency. In practice, these systems provide nursing or interprofessional teams with nursing-sensitive indicator feedback. Feedback is essential since it commits teams to improve their practice, although it appears somewhat haphazard and, at times, overlooked. Research findings suggest that contextual dynamics, initial system performance and feedback modes interact in unknown ways. This rapid review aims to produce a theorization to explain what works in which contexts, and how feedback to nursing or interprofessional teams shape nursing performance improvement systems.

methodsBased on theory-driven realist methodology, with reference to an innovative combination of Actor-Network Theory and Critical Realist philosophy principles, this realist rapid review entailed an iterative procedure: 8766 documents in French and English, published between 2010 and 2018, were identified via 5 databases, and 23 were selected and analysed. Two expert panels (scientific and clinical) were consulted to improve the synthesis and systemic modelling of an original feedback theorization.

resultsWe identified three hypotheses, subdivided into twelve generative configurations to explain how feedback mobilizes nursing or interprofessional teams. Empirically founded and actionable, these propositions are supported by expert panels. Each configuration specifies contextualized mechanisms that explain feedback and team outcomes. Socially mediated mechanisms are particularly generative of action and agency.

conclusionsThis rapid realist review provides an informative theoretical proposition to embrace the complexity of nursing-sensitive indicator feedback with nursing or interdisciplinary teams. Building on general explanations previously observed, this review provides insight into a deep explanation of feedback mechanisms. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Prospero CRD42018110128 .

Indexed as

FeedbackHumansEfficiencyFeedbackHealth careNursesOrganizationalOutcome and process assessmentQuality improvementQuality of health careReview

Identifiers

PMID36002846
PMCPMC9404638

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.