Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37886364›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in medicine2023

How and why might interprofessional patient- and family-centered rounds improve outcomes among healthcare teams and hospitalized patients? A conceptual framework informed by scoping and narrative literature review methods.

Erin Abu-Rish Blakeney, Jennifer Baird, Genevieve Beaird, Alisa Khan, Victoria M Parente, Kevin D O'Brien, Brenda K Zierler, Kevin J O'Leary, Bryan J Weiner

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  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

9 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Erin Abu-Rish BlakeneyDepartment of Biobehavioral Nursing and Health Informatics, School of Nursing, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Jennifer BairdChildren's Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Genevieve BeairdSchool of Nursing, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States.
Alisa KhanDepartment of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Victoria M ParenteSchool of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States.
Kevin D O'BrienDepartment of Cardiology, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Brenda K ZierlerDepartment of Biobehavioral Nursing and Health Informatics, School of Nursing, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Kevin J O'LearyFeinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States.
Bryan J WeinerDepartment of Global Health, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
University of Washington · USBoston Children's Hospital · USChildren's Hospital of Los Angeles · USDuke University · USNeurobehavioral Systems · USNorthwestern University · USVirginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

Duke Center for Advancement of Child Health (CAtCH)K12HD105253 · NICHD · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Corinne Mary Linardic, Ann M. Reed · 2021 to 2026
$1.5M
Implementation and Sustainment of Team-Based Practice Transformation to Improve Heart Failure Care and OutcomesK23HL144910 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Erin Lindsey Blakeney · 2021 to 2026
$906k
NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL144910NICHD NIH HHS K12 HD105253
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Poor communication within healthcare contributes to inefficiencies, medical errors, conflict, and other adverse outcomes. A promising model to improve outcomes resulting from poor communication in the inpatient hospital setting is Interprofessional Patient- and Family-Centered rounds (IPFCR). IPFCR brings two or more health professions together with hospitalized patients and families as part of a consistent, team-based routine to share information and collaboratively arrive at a daily plan of care. A growing body of literature focuses on implementation and outcomes of IPFCR to improve healthcare quality and team and patient outcomes. Most studies report positive changes following IPFCR implementation. However, conceptual frameworks and theoretical models are lacking in the IPFCR literature and represent a major gap that needs to be addressed to move this field forward. The purpose of this two-part review is to propose a conceptual framework of how IPFCR works. The goal is to articulate a framework that can be tested in subsequent research studies. Published IPFCR literature and relevant theories and frameworks were examined and synthesized to explore how IPFCR works, to situate IPFCR in relation to existing models and frameworks, and to postulate core components and underlying causal mechanisms. A preliminary, context-specific, conceptual framework is proposed illustrating interrelationships between four core components of IPFCR (interprofessional approach, intentional patient and family engagement, rounding structure, shared development of a daily care plan), improvements in communication, and better outcomes.

Indexed as

communicationhospitalinterprofessionalpatient- and family-centered careroundsroutinessafetyteam-based care

Identifiers

PMID37886364
PMCPMC10598853
OpenAlexW4387519574

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.