WITHDRAWN: Nursing record systems: effects on nursing practice and healthcare outcomes.

BACKGROUND: A nursing record system is the record of care that was planned or given to individual patients and clients by qualified nurses or other caregivers under the direction of a qualified nurse. Nursing record systems may be an effective way of influencing nurse practice. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of nursing record systems on nursing practice and patient outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: For the original version of this review in 2000, and updates in 2003 and 2008, we searched: the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Specialised Register; MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, BNI, ISI Web of Knowledge, and ASLIB Index of Theses. We also handsearched: Computers, Informatics, Nursing (Computers in Nursing); Information Technology in Nursing; and the Journal of Nursing Administration. For this update, searches can be considered complete until the end of 2007. We checked reference lists of retrieved articles and other related reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled before and after studies, and interrupted time series comparing one kind of nursing record system with another in hospital, community or primary care settings. The participants were qualified nurses, students or healthcare assistants working under the direction of a qualified nurse, and patients receiving care recorded or planned using nursing record systems. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors (in two pairs) independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: We included nine trials (eight RCTs, one controlled before and after study) involving 1846 people. The studies that evaluated nursing record systems focusing on relatively discrete and focused problems, for example effective pain management in children, empowering pregnant women and parents, reducing loss of notes, reducing time spent on data entry of test results, reducing transcription errors, and reducing the number of pieces of paper in a record, all demonstrated some degree of success in achieving the desired results. Studies of nursing care planning systems and total nurse records demonstrated uncertain or equivocal results. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found some limited evidence of effects on practice attributable to changes in record systems. It is clear from the literature that it is possible to set up the randomised trials or other quasi-experimental designs needed to produce evidence for practice. Qualitative nursing research to explore the relationship between practice and information use could be used as a precursor to the design and testing of nursing information systems.

Home uterine monitoring for detecting preterm labour.

BACKGROUND: To reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with preterm birth, home uterine activity monitoring aims for early detection of increased contraction frequency, and early intervention with tocolytic drugs to inhibit labour and prolong pregnancy. However, the effectiveness of such monitoring is disputed. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether home uterine activity monitoring is effective in improving the outcomes for women and their infants considered to be at high risk of preterm birth, when compared with care that does not include home uterine activity monitoring. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 June 2016), CENTRAL (Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 5), MEDLINE (1966 to 28 June 2016), Embase (1974 to 28 June 2016), CINAHL (1982 to 28 June 2016), and scanned reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised control trials of home uterine activity monitoring, with or without patient education programmes, for women at risk of preterm birth, compared with care that does not include home uterine activity monitoring. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risks of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We did not attempt to contact authors to resolve queries. We assessed the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: There were 15 included studies (6008 enrolled participants); 13 studies contributed data. Women using home uterine monitoring were less likely to experience preterm birth at less than 34 weeks (risk ratio (RR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 0.99; three studies, 1596 women; fixed-effect analysis) (GRADE high). This difference was not evident when we carried out a sensitivity analysis, restricting the analysis to studies at low risk of bias based on study quality (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.00; one study, 1292 women). There was no difference in the rate of perinatal mortality (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.72; two studies, 2589 babies) (GRADE low).There was no difference in the number of preterm births at less than 37 weeks (average RR 0.85, CI 0.72 to 1.01; eight studies, 4834 women; random-effects, Tau2 = 0.03, I2 = 68%) (GRADE very low). Infants born to women using home uterine monitoring were less likely to be admitted to neonatal intensive care unit (average RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.96; five studies, 2367 babies; random-effects, Tau2 = 0.02, I2 = 32%) (GRADE moderate). This difference was not maintained when we restricted the analysis to studies at low risk of bias (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.01; one study, 1292 babies). Women using home uterine monitoring made more unscheduled antenatal visits (mean difference (MD) 0.48, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.64; two studies, 1994 women) (GRADE moderate). Women using home uterine monitoring were also more likely to have prophylactic tocolytic drug therapy (average RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.45; seven studies, 4316 women; random-effects, Tau2 = 0.03, I2 = 62%), but this difference was no longer evident when we restricted the analysis to studies at low risk of bias (average RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.65; three studies, 3749 women; random-effects, Tau2 = 0.05, I2 = 76%) (GRADE low). The number of antenatal hospital admissions did not differ between home groups (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.11; three studies, 1494 women (GRADE low)). We found no data on maternal anxiety or acceptability. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Home uterine monitoring may result in fewer admissions to a neonatal intensive care unit but in more unscheduled antenatal visits and tocolytic treatment; the level of evidence is generally low to moderate. Important group differences were not evident when we undertook sensitivity analysis using only trials at low risk of bias. There is no impact on maternal and perinatal outcomes such as perinatal mortality or incidence of preterm birth.

Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis of Health IT.

This contribution examines how systematic reviews contribute to the evaluation of health IT planning and implementation. It defines and explains the systematic review process and how higher level overviews of health IT can be conducted. A reprise of some of the Cochrane reviews relating to health IT, particularly those conducted for the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group (EPOC), provides examples of the type of question that can be answered (at least in part) by a Cochrane-type systematic review. The contribution also discusses the benefits and limitations of the systematic review process using examples of reviews on telemedicine, nursing records, and home uterine monitoring in pregnancy.

Home uterine monitoring for detecting preterm labour.

BACKGROUND: To reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with preterm birth, home uterine activity monitoring aims for early detection of increased contraction frequency, and early intervention with tocolytic drugs to inhibit labour and prolong pregnancy. However, the effectiveness of such monitoring is disputed. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether home uterine activity monitoring is effective in improving the outcomes for women and their infants considered to be at high risk of preterm birth, when compared with conventional or other care packages that do not include home uterine monitoring. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 October 2014), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1966 to 31 August 2014), EMBASE (1974 to 31 August 2014), CINAHL (1982 to 31 August 2014) and scanned reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised control trials of home uterine activity monitoring, with or without patient education programmes, for women at risk for preterm birth, in comparison to the same care package without home uterine activity monitoring. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We did not attempt to contact authors to resolve queries. MAIN RESULTS: There were 15 included studies (total number of enrolled participants 6008); 13 studies contributed data. Women using home uterine monitoring were less likely to experience preterm birth at less than 34 weeks (risk ratio (RR) 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 0.99; three studies, n = 1596; fixed-effect analysis) (GRADE high). The significant difference was not evident when we carried out a sensitivity analysis, restricting the analysis to studies at low risk of bias based on study quality (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.57 to 1.00, one study, 1292 women). There was no significant difference in the rate of perinatal mortality (RR 1.22; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.72; two studies, n = 2589) (GRADE low)There was no significant difference in the number of preterm births at less than 37 weeks (average RR 0.85; CI 0.72 to 1.01; eight studies, n = 4834; random-effects, T² = 0.03, I² = 68%) (GRADE very low). Infants born to women using home uterine monitoring were less likely to be admitted to neonatal intensive care unit (average RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.62 to 0.96; five studies, n = 2367; random-effects, T² = 0.02, I² = 32%) (GRADE moderate). The difference was not statistically significant when only high quality studies were included (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.74 to 1.01; one study, n = 1292). Women using home uterine monitoring made more unscheduled antenatal visits (mean difference (MD) 0.49; 95% CI 0.39 to 0.62; two studies, n = 3707) (GRADE moderate). Women using home uterine monitoring were also more likely to have prophylactic tocolytic drug therapy (average RR 1.21; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.45; seven studies, n = 4316; random-effects. T² = 0.03, I² = 62%) but this difference was no longer significant when the analysis was restricted to higher quality studies (average RR 1.22; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.65, three studies, n = 3749,random-effects, T² = 0.05, I² = 76%) (GRADE low). One small study reported that the home uterine monitoring group spent fewer days in hospital antenatally. No data on maternal anxiety or acceptability were found. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Home uterine monitoring may result in fewer admissions to a neonatal intensive care unit but more unscheduled antenatal visits and tocolytic treatment, but the level of evidence is generally low to moderate. Important group differences were not evident when sensitivity analysis was undertaken using only high quality trials. There is no impact on maternal and perinatal outcomes such as perinatal mortality or incidence of preterm birth.

Home uterine monitoring for detecting preterm labour.

BACKGROUND: To reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with preterm birth, home uterine activity monitoring aims for early detection of increased contraction frequency, and early intervention with tocolytic drugs to inhibit labour and prolong pregnancy. However, the effectiveness of such monitoring is disputed. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether home uterine activity monitoring is effective in improving the outcomes for women and their infants considered to be at high risk of preterm birth, when compared with conventional or other care packages that do not include home uterine monitoring. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 November 2011), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 4 of 4), MEDLINE (1966 to 30 November 2011), EMBASE (1974 to 30 November 2011), CINAHL (1982 to 30 November 2011) and scanned reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised control trials of home uterine activity monitoring, with or without patient education programmes, for women at risk for preterm birth, in comparison to the same care package without home uterine activity monitoring. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Data were checked for accuracy. We did not attempt to contact authors to resolve queries. MAIN RESULTS: There were 15 included studies (total number of enrolled participants 6008); 13 studies contributed data. Women using home uterine monitoring were less likely to experience preterm birth at less than 34 weeks (risk ratio (RR) 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 0.99; three studies, n = 1596; fixed-effect analysis). However, this significant difference was not evident when we carried out a sensitivity analysis, restricting the analysis to studies at low risk of bias based on study quality (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.57 to 1.00, one study, 1292 women). There was no significant difference in the rate of perinatal mortality (RR 1.22; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.72; two studies, n = 2589).There was no significant difference in the number of preterm births at less than 37 weeks (average RR 0.85; CI 0.72 to 1.01; eight studies, n = 4834; random effects, T(2) = 0.03, I(2) = 68%). Infants born to women using home uterine monitoring were less likely to be admitted to neonatal intensive care unit (average RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.62 to 0.96; five studies, n = 2367; random-effects, T(2) = 0.02, I(2) = 32%). Although this difference was not statistically significant when only high quality studies were included (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.74 to 1.01; one study, n = 1292). Women using home uterine monitoring made more unscheduled antenatal visits (mean difference (MD) 0.49; 95% CI 0.39 to 0.62; two studies, n = 2807). Women using home uterine monitoring were also more likely to have prophylactic tocolytic drug therapy (average RR 1.21; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.45; seven studies, n = 4316; random-effects. T(2) = 0.03, I(2) = 62%) but this difference was no longer significant when the analysis was restricted to high quality studies (average RR 1.22; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.65, three studies, n = 3749,random effects, T(2) = 0.05, I(2) = 76%). One small study reported that the home uterine monitoring group spent fewer days in hospital antenatally. No data on maternal anxiety or acceptability were found. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Home uterine monitoring may result in fewer admissions to a neonatal intensive care unit but more unscheduled antenatal visits and tocolytic treatment. There is no impact on maternal and perinatal outcomes such as perinatal mortality or incidence of preterm birth.

Home uterine monitoring: a case of telemedicine failure?

The aim of the article is to explore and explain some of the controversies around home uterine monitoring, using a socio-technical interaction networks (STIN) approach. A Cochrane systematic review identified 15 included studies. A critique of these studies, using the eight components of the STIN framework, illustrated very clearly the different assumptions made about the purpose of home uterine monitoring, and helped to explain the different outcomes. The final mapping stage suggested that systems architecture choices included that of the role of monitoring support, to complement patient education or to enhance education for provider and patient. A similar choice concerned the type and extent of patient-care-provider contacts to be used. Using the STIN framework provided a useful perspective on the telemedicine aspects of home uterine monitoring, providing value beyond the systematic review conclusions alone.

Nursing record systems: effects on nursing practice and healthcare outcomes.

BACKGROUND: A nursing record system is the record of care that was planned or given to individual patients and clients by qualified nurses or other caregivers under the direction of a qualified nurse. Nursing record systems may be an effective way of influencing nurse practice. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of nursing record systems on nursing practice and patient outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: For the original version of this review in 2000, and updates in 2003 and 2008, we searched: the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Specialised Register; MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, BNI, ISI Web of Knowledge, and ASLIB Index of Theses. We also handsearched: Computers, Informatics, Nursing (Computers in Nursing); Information Technology in Nursing; and the Journal of Nursing Administration. For this update, searches can be considered complete until the end of 2007. We checked reference lists of retrieved articles and other related reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled before and after studies, and interrupted time series comparing one kind of nursing record system with another in hospital, community or primary care settings. The participants were qualified nurses, students or healthcare assistants working under the direction of a qualified nurse, and patients receiving care recorded or planned using nursing record systems. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors (in two pairs) independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: We included nine trials (eight RCTs, one controlled before and after study) involving 1846 people. The studies that evaluated nursing record systems focusing on relatively discrete and focused problems, for example effective pain management in children, empowering pregnant women and parents, reducing loss of notes, reducing time spent on data entry of test results, reducing transcription errors, and reducing the number of pieces of paper in a record, all demonstrated some degree of success in achieving the desired results. Studies of nursing care planning systems and total nurse records demonstrated uncertain or equivocal results. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found some limited evidence of effects on practice attributable to changes in record systems. It is clear from the literature that it is possible to set up the randomised trials or other quasi-experimental designs needed to produce evidence for practice. Qualitative nursing research to explore the relationship between practice and information use could be used as a precursor to the design and testing of nursing information systems.

Characteristics of Primary Care Trusts in financial deficit and surplus - a comparative study in the English NHS.

BACKGROUND: Recently the financial status of primary care trusts has come under considerable scrutiny by the government, and financial deficits have been blamed on poor local management of resources. This paper examines the factors that differ between those Primary Care Trusts (PCT) in financial deficit and those in surplus, using readily available data at PCT level. PCTs are the National Health Service organisations in England responsible for improving the health of their population, developing primary and community health services, and commissioning secondary care services. METHODS: A descriptive comparative study using data from 58 PCTs; 29 in greatest financial surplus and 29 in greatest deficit in the English National Health Service. RESULTS: Nearly half the study deficit PCTs (14 out of 29) are in the East of England and of the 29 surplus PCTs, five each are in Birmingham and Black Country Strategic Health Authority (SHA), and Greater Manchester SHA. The median population density of the deficit PCTs is almost seven times lower than that of surplus PCTs (p = 0.004). Surplus PCTs predominantly serve deprived communities. Nearly half the surplus PCTs are 'spearhead' PCTs compared to only one of the deficit PCTs. Percentage population increase by local authority of the PCT showed that on average deficit PCTs had 2.7 times higher change during 1982-2002 (13.37% for deficit and 4.94% for surplus PCTs). Work pressure felt by staff is significantly higher in deficit PCTs, and they also reported working higher amount of extra hours due to work pressures. The proportion of dispensing general practitioners is significantly higher in deficit PCTs 40.5% vs. 12.9% (p = 0.002). Deficit PCTs on average received pound123 less per head of registered population compared to surplus PCTs. CONCLUSION: The two groups of PCTs serve two distinct populations with marked differences between the two. Deficit PCTs tend to be in relatively affluent and rural areas. Poor management alone is unlikely to be the cause of deficits, and potential reasons for deficits including rurality and increased demand for health services in more affluent communities need further in-depth studies.