ReviewMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2026
[Standardized ward rounds in the intensive care unit].
Review in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Daily ward rounds are a central element of intensive care, but exhibit significant differences in procedure, duration, and team composition. Unstructured ward rounds carry risks of communication errors, incomplete decisions, and avoidable patient harm. Structured, interprofessional ward rounds are increasingly considered a quality indicator, as they improve communication, safety and outcome quality. The aim of this work is to present the evidence, benefits, and implementation strategies of structured, interprofessional ward rounds in internal medicine intensive care units and to evaluate their impact on quality of care and clinical outcomes. Based on current literature (guidelines, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, primary studies), the effectiveness of structured ward rounds as well as process and outcome indicators (mortality, length of stay, patient safety) are analyzed. Structured ward rounds with checklists, clear procedures, and interprofessional participation significantly reduce in-hospital and 30-day mortality (OR 0.84), reduce ventilation duration, infection rates (ventilator-associated pneumonia, catheter-associated urinary tract infection, central line-associated bloodstream infection), and length of stay in the intensive care unit. They improve communication, team dynamics, safety culture, and patient satisfaction. Studies show efficiency gains through less miscommunication and faster decision-making. The positive effects of structured ward rounds are based on improved process quality, collaborative decision-making, and transparent documentation. Successful implementation requires leadership, training, and site-specific adaptation. Challenges include hierarchies, resource constraints, and cultural acceptance. Structured ward rounds are an evidence-based instrument of clinical excellence that sustainably strengthens patient safety, outcomes, and teamwork.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41790200What 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.