ABSTRACT
Poor communication within healthcare teams occurs commonly, contributing to inefficiency, medical errors, conflict, and other adverse outcomes. Interprofessional bedside rounds (IBR) are a promising model that brings two or more health professions together with patients and families as part of a consistent, team-based routine to share information and collaboratively arrive at a daily plan of care. The purpose of this systematic scoping review was to investigate the breadth and quality of IBR literature to identify and describe gaps and opportunities for future research. We followed an adapted Arksey and O'Malley Framework and PRISMA scoping review guidelines. PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Embase were systematically searched for key IBR words and concepts through June 2020. Seventy-nine articles met inclusion criteria and underwent data abstraction. Study quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Assessment Tool. Publications in this field have increased since 2014, and the majority of studies reported positive impacts of IBR implementation across an array of team, patient, and care quality/delivery outcomes. Despite the preponderance of positive findings, great heterogeneity, and a reliance on quantitative non-randomized study designs remain in the extant research. A growing number of interventions to improve safety, quality, and care experiences in hospital settings focus on redesigning daily inpatient rounds. Limited information on IBR characteristics and implementation strategies coupled with widespread variation in terminology, study quality, and design create challenges in assessing the effectiveness of models of rounds and optimal implementation strategies. This scoping review highlights the need for additional studies of rounding models, implementation strategies, and outcomes that facilitate comparative research.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The identification of elderly at risk of new functional disabilities in activities of daily living at admission to the hospital may facilitate referral for purposive interventions to prevent decline and institutionalization. This study was aimed at designing a risk prediction model for identifying the elderly at risk of admission in Iran's hospitals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a cross-sectional descriptive study conducted in 2017. In order to formulate and validate a prediction model, the study was done in two development and validation cohort study. Functional decline was defined as a decline of at least one point on the Katz ADL index at follow-up compared with preadmission status. RESULTS: In development cohort, the mean age was 71 years including 54% of men and 46% women, 22% of men and 17% of women experienced functional decline after 3 months. In the validation cohort, the mean age was 70 years, including 49% of men and 51% women, 19% of men and 15% of women, functional decline after 3 months was observed. CONCLUSION: On the basis of the findings, aging at risk of hospital admission can be identified by easy designed model with four questions: (1) Is the patient's age more than 85 years? (2) Does the patient's mini mental status <22? (3) Does the patient need help for using general transporting? (4) Has the patient lost weight <5% over the past 6 months and body mass index <18.5? And also geriatrics experts can use the designed model as a predictive tool in order to improve the quality level of healthcare services to elderly as a vulnerable and high risk group. The important point of model is easy to use even for nonspecialists.
