Is the information of systematic reviews published in nursing journals up-to-date? a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: An up-to-date systematic review is important for researchers to decide whether to embark on new research or continue supporting ongoing studies. The aim of this study is to examine the time taken between the last search, submission, acceptance and publication dates of systematic reviews published in nursing journals. METHODS: Nursing journals indexed in Journal Citation Reports were first identified. Thereafter, systematic reviews published in these journals in 2014 were extracted from three databases. The quality of the systematic reviews were evaluated by the AMSTAR. The last search, submission, acceptance, online publication, full publication dates and other characteristics of the systematic reviews were recorded. The time taken between the five dates was then computed. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the time differences; non-parametric statistics were used to examine the association between the time taken from the last search and full publication alongside other potential factors, including the funding support, submission during holiday periods, number of records retrieved from database, inclusion of meta-analysis, and quality of the review. RESULTS: A total of 107 nursing journals were included in this study, from which 1070 articles were identified through the database search. After screening for eligibility, 202 systematic reviews were included in the analysis. The quality of these reviews was low with the median score of 3 out of 11. A total of 172 (85.1%), 72 (35.6%), 153 (75.7%) and 149 (73.8%) systematic reviews provided their last search, submission, acceptance and online published dates respectively. The median numbers of days taken from the last search to acceptance and to full publication were, respectively, 393 (IQR: 212-609) and 669 (427-915) whereas that from submission to full publication was 365 (243-486). Moreover, the median number of days from the last search to submission and from submission to online publication were 167.5 (53.5-427) and 153 (92-212), respectively. No significant association were revealed between the time lag and those potential factors. CONCLUSION: The median time from the last search to acceptance for systematic reviews published in nursing journals was 393 days. Readers for systematic reviews are advised to check the time taken from the last search date of the reviews in order to ensure that up-to-date evidence is consulted for effective clinical decision-making.

Supporting Clinical Nurses Through a Research Fellowship.

After reviewing the literature, nurses at the bedside seeking answers to clinical questions may find their inquiries remain unanswered. This article describes the yearlong Research Fellows Program in which candidates, funded for 12 hours per month of research release time, answered formal research questions in a curriculum designed to provide the skills to complete their study. Five have completed their studies; 1 has received a grant to continue. Two are in process of submitting manuscripts to journals.

Clinical Effectiveness and Cost of a Hospital-Based Fall Prevention Intervention: The Importance of Time Nurses Spend on the Front Line of Implementation.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and incremental net cost of a fall prevention intervention that involved hourly rounding by RNs at 2 hospitals. BACKGROUND: Minimizing in-hospital falls is a priority, but little is known about the value of fall prevention interventions. METHODS: We used an uncontrolled before-after design to evaluate changes in fall rates and time use by RNs. Using decision-analytical models, we estimated incremental net costs per hospital per year. RESULTS: Falls declined at 1 hospital (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26-0.87; P = .016), but not the other (IRR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.59-1.17; P = .28). Cost analyses projected a 67.9% to 72.2% probability of net savings at both hospitals due to unexpected declines in the time that RNs spent in fall-related activities. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating fall prevention into hourly rounds might improve value. Time that RNs invest in implementing quality improvement interventions can equate to sizable opportunity costs or savings.

The Bundled Care Disruption.

The new administration and Congress will wrestle with the Affordable Care Act and options. In the meantime, several reimbursement programs designed to disrupt current approaches to patient care delivery continue, including the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services bundled payment program. Chief nurse executives must prepare to advance processes and care models that align with bundled payments and the broader ambition to eliminate care variation.

Quantity and Quality of Economic Evaluations in U.S. Nursing Research, 1997-2015: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The United States has a complex healthcare system that is undergoing substantial reformations. There is a need for high-quality, economic evaluations of nursing practice. An updated review of completed economic evaluations relevant to the field of nursing within the U.S. healthcare system is timely and needed. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and describe the quantity and quality of economic evaluations in nursing-relevant research performed in the United States between 1997 and 2015. METHODS: Four databases were searched. Titles, abstracts, and full-text content were reviewed to identify studies that analyzed both costs and outcomes, relevant to nursing, performed in the United States, and used the quality-adjusted life year to measure effectiveness. For included studies, data were extracted from full-text articles using criteria from U.S. Public Health Service's Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Most (n = 25, 89%) were published in the last decade of the analysis, from 2006 to 2015. Assessment of quality, based on selected items from the panel guidelines, found that the evaluations did not consistently use the recommended societal perspective, use multiple resource utilization categories, use constant dollars, discount future costs and outcomes, use a lifetime horizon, or include an indication of uncertainty in results. The only resource utilization category consistently included across studies was healthcare resources. DISCUSSION: Only 28 nursing-related studies meeting the inclusion criteria were identified as meeting robust health economic evaluation methodological criteria, and most did not include all important guideline items. Despite increases in absolute numbers of published studies over the past decade, economic evaluation has been underutilized in U.S. nursing-relevant research in the past two decades.

Staying Connected: Sustaining Collaborative Care Models with Limited Funding.

Providing psychiatric services in the primary care setting is challenging. The multidisciplinary, coordinated approach of collaborative care models (CCMs) addresses these challenges. The purpose of the current article is to discuss the implementation of a CCM at a free medical clinic (FMC) where volunteer staff provide the majority of services. Essential components of CCMs include (a) comprehensive screening and assessment, (b) shared development and communication of care plans among providers and the patient, and (c) care coordination and management. Challenges to implementing and sustaining a CCM at a FMC in Virginia attempting to meet the medical and psychiatric needs of the underserved are addressed. Although the CCM produced favorable outcomes, sustaining the model long-term presented many challenges. Strategies for addressing these challenges are discussed.

Evidence-based practice: a model for clinical application.

Health care reform authorized by the Affordable Care Act is based on the belief that evidence-based practice (EBP) generates cost savings due to the delivery of more effective care. Published meta-analyses and systematic reviews provide clear, unbiased evidence on the effectiveness of specific interventions. Yet translating the interventions into the practice setting requires additional clinical skills and judgments extending beyond the scientific assessment of the EBP literature. Effective use of EBP interventions requires clinicians effectively answering an additional set of questions specific to the case and clinical context. These questions focus on correctly identifying the problem and increased level of specificity for any given situation. Using a clinical application of the PICO model, the clinician and the patient should be able to achieve a higher level of clinical outcomes.

Innovation amidst radical cost containment in health care.

The changing health care environment is requiring nurse executives within a hospital setting to design and implement innovative workforce practices that will both improve patient outcomes and lower costs. Since registered nurses comprise the largest percentage of a hospital's workforce, finding ways to incorporate them in these efforts is essential. The Magnet Recognition Program through the American Nurses Credentialing Center is one successful evidence-based strategy that can be adopted to engage nurses in quality improvement processes. This article describes how two community hospitals used the principles of the Magnet Recognition Program to develop and implement new approaches to meet the health care imperative of providing safer, high-quality, cost-effective care.

Implementing evidence-based practice during an economic downturn.

Building a sustainable evidence-based practice (EBP) infrastructure during times of financial constraints poses challenges for nurse leaders. To be successful, plans need to be creative and adaptive, while mindful of limited resources. This commentary describes change management strategies used to implement an EBP infrastructure at a hospital after organizational restructuring occurred.

Return on investment imperative: the cost of care calculator for an evidence-based practice program.

The key elements of the evaluation process of an evidence-based practice (EBP) program and the infrastructure needed as identified by a large health care organization. The EBP evaluation program has 2 major elements for measuring success. The first component for evaluation is the impact on the clinical outcomes of care and the second is the fiscal implications of implementing the EBP. This article focuses on the fiscal evaluation component and describes a process to calculate the cost of care compared to before and after implementation of the EBP. The literature to support the care calculations is examined and a cost algorithm is described.

Fostering evidence-based practice to improve nurse and cost outcomes in a community health setting: a pilot test of the advancing research and clinical practice through close collaboration model.

Although evidence-based practice (EBP) improves health care quality, decreases costs, and empowers nurses, there is a paucity of intervention studies designed to test models of how to enhance nurses' use of EBP. Therefore, the specific aim of this study was to determine the preliminary effects of implementing the Advancing Research and Clinical practice through close Collaboration (ARCC) model on nurses' EBP beliefs, EBP implementation behaviors, group cohesion, productivity, job satisfaction, and attrition/turnover rates. A 2-group randomized controlled pilot trial was used with 46 nurses from the Visiting Nurse Service of New York. The ARCC group versus an attention control group had stronger EBP beliefs, higher EBP implementation behaviors, more group cohesion, and less attrition/turnover. Implementation of the ARCC model in health care systems may be a promising strategy for enhancing EBP and improving nurse and cost outcomes.

Linking economics and quality: developing an evidence-based nurse staffing tool.

The evidence linking nurse staffing with patient outcomes has been established; however, incorporating the evidence into practice is lagging. This article describes a practice/academic collaborative initiated to promote the translation of staffing research into decision-making through the development of an evidence-based staffing tool. Reports of previous research on nurse staffing and patient and financial outcomes are summarized, and aspects of the 2 phases of the collaborative to date are discussed. In the initial phase, a pilot research study on nurse staffing and patient outcomes in medical-surgical units support previous findings that higher nurse staffing results in positive patient outcomes. The focus in the current phase is expansion of the pilot research and the development of a decision-making staffing tool based on the additional staffing research. Identifying the critical data elements and sources of the data are major challenges to achieving the project objectives. Other challenges are maintaining interest and creating wide-spread understanding of the importance of nurse managers having access to timely, useable information. The success of the collaborative is due to the commitment and participation of leaders from various disciplines in both organizations.