ArticlePloS one2024
Patterns of interactions among ICU interprofessional teams: A prospective patient-shift-level survey approach.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- An electronic health record metadata-mining approach to identifying patient-level interprofessional clinician teams in the intensive care unit.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- A mixed methods study of backup behavior among interprofessional ICU teams.Heart & lung : the journal of critical careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Awakening, Breathing Coordination, Delirium monitoring and Early mobility bundle (ABCDE) is associated with lower mortality for intensive care unit (ICU) patients. However, efforts to improve ABCDE are variably successful, possibly due to lack of clarity about who are the team members interacting when caring for each patient, each shift. Lack of patient shift-level information regarding who is interacting with whom limits the ability to tailor interventions to the specific ICU team to improve ABCDE.
objectiveDetermine the number and types of individuals (i.e., clinicians and family members) interacting in the care of mechanically ventilated (MV) patients, as reported by the patients' assigned physician, nurse, and respiratory therapist (RT) each shift, using a network science lens.
methodsWe conducted a prospective, patient-shift-level survey in 2 medical ICUs. For each patient, we surveyed the assigned physician, nurse, and RT each day and night shift about who they interacted with when providing ABCDE for each patient-shift. We determined the number and types of interactions, reported by physicians, nurses, and RTs and day versus night shift.
resultsFrom 1558 surveys from 404 clinicians who cared for 169 patients over 166 shifts (65% response rate), clinicians reported interacting with 2.6 individuals each shift (physicians: 2.65, nurses: 3.33, RTs: 1.86); this was fewer on night shift compared to day shift (1.99 versus 3.02). Most frequent interactions were with the bedside nurse, attending, resident, intern, and RT; family member interactions were reported in less than 1 in 5 surveys (12.2% of physician surveys, 19.7% of nurse surveys, 4.9% of RT surveys).
interpretationClinicians reported interacting with 3-4 clinicians each shift, and fewer on nights. Nurses interacted with the most clincians and family members. Interventions targeting shift-level teams, focusing on nurses and family members, may be a way to improve ABCDE delivery and ICU teamwork.
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.