Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38097283›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open quality2023

Quality of fluid balance charting and interventions to improve it: a systematic review.

Lisbeth Roesen Leinum, Marianne Krogsgaard, Sara Tantholdt-Hansen, Ismail Gögenur, Anders Ohlhues Baandrup, Nessn Azawi

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open quality, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Evaluation of a real-life experience with a digital fluid balance monitoring technology.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2024
    Article
  15. Digitizing fluid balance monitoring may offer a solution for optimizing patient care.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2024
    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

6 authors.

Lisbeth Roesen LeinumDepartment of Urology, Zealand University Hospital, Roskilde, Denmark lrl@regionsjaelland.dk.ORCID 0000-0003-2426-8346
Marianne KrogsgaardDepartment of Surgery, Zealand University Hospital, Koge, Denmark.
Sara Tantholdt-HansenDepartment of Urology, Zealand University Hospital, Roskilde, Denmark.
Ismail GögenurClinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Kobenhavn, Denmark.
Anders Ohlhues BaandrupDepartment of Radiology, Zealand University Hospital, Roskilde, Denmark.
Nessn AzawiDepartment of Urology, Zealand University Hospital, Roskilde, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionFluid balance monitoring is pivotal to patients' health. Thus, fluid balance charting is an essential part of clinical nursing documentation. This systematic review aimed to investigate and describe the quality of fluid balance monitoring in medical, surgical and intensive care units, with an emphasis on the completeness of charting data, calculation errors and accuracy, and to evaluate methods used to improve fluid balance charting. MATERIALS AND

methodsQuantitative studies involving adult patients and reporting data on fluid balance monitoring were included in the review. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library. The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using tools developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute.

resultsWe included a total of 23 studies, which involved 6649 participants. The studies were quasi-experimental, cohort or prevalence studies, and every third study was of low quality. Definitions of 'completeness' varied, as well as patient categories and time of evaluation. Eighteen studies reported the prevalence of patients with complete fluid balance charts; of those, 10 reported that not more than 50% of fluid balance charts were complete. Studies addressing calculation errors found them in 25%-35% of charts, including omissions of, for example, intravenous medications. The reported interventions consisted of various components such as policies, education, equipment, visual aids, surveillance and dissemination of results. Among studies evaluating interventions, only 38% (5 of 13) achieved compliance with at least 75% of complete fluid balance charts. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies, a meta-analysis was not possible.

conclusionThe quality of fluid balance charting is inadequate in most studies, and calculation errors influence quality. Interventions included several components, and the impact on the completion of fluid balance charts varied.

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsWater-Electrolyte BalanceAdultCross-Sectional StudiesHumansnursesquality measurementstandards of care

Identifiers

PMID38097283
PMCPMC10729040

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.