The association between advanced practice nursing roles and outcomes in adults following cardiac surgery: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Empirical findings have shown significant and non-significant effects of advanced practice nursing roles within postoperative cardiac settings. The inconsistencies of the current literature preclude the identification of a significant effect of advanced practice nursing roles on patient and organizational outcomes. OBJECTIVE: 1) identify patient and organizational outcomes of advanced practice nursing roles in postoperative cardiac surgery and 2) synthesize the evidence of current roles of advanced practice nurses in postoperative cardiac surgery to provide the best quality of care for patients. METHOD: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials was conducted in six electronic databases, including Medline, CINHAL, Embase, Cochrane Database, Joanna Briggs Database and Web of Science, and the grey literature. Randomized controlled trials published after 1999 were included if they examined advanced practice nursing roles and recruited patients who underwent cardiac surgery. The study selection was performed by two independent reviewers, and consensus was achieved with a third reviewer. Data extraction was conducted by one reviewer and revised by a second reviewer. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed with the Evidence Project risk of bias tool by two independent reviewers and revised by a third reviewer. A narrative synthesis of the available evidence was completed. No meta-analysis technique was attempted because of the high heterogeneity of the included studies. RESULTS: Among 4,448 retrieved papers, ten randomized controlled trials and three secondary analyses were included in this review. The methodological quality of the included studies was moderate. All studies included a comparison group and the majority of the studies collected data using a blinded researcher. However, all studies were based on small sample sizes and failed to randomly recruit participants. Five studies implemented nurse practitioner roles and five studies implemented clinical nurse specialist roles. The advanced practice nursing care included health condition management, lifestyle promotion and coping strategies with patients. A total of 22 outcomes were identified, including 13 patient outcomes (e.g., depressive symptoms) and nine organizational outcomes (e.g., rehospitalization after discharge). Each outcome was examined in one to five studies. All of the included outcomes were associated with inconsistent findings. CONCLUSION: The findings from existing literature remain inconsistent. The high risk of bias and the small sample sizes could potentially explain the non-significant findings. Avenues for future research should focus on the development of methodologically high-quality studies with larger sample sizes to enhance our understanding of the effectiveness of advanced practice nursing roles.

Patient and family views of team functioning in primary healthcare teams with nurse practitioners: a survey of patient-reported experience and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Nurse practitioners (NPs) have been added to primary healthcare teams to improve access to care. Team processes, including communication and decision-making, explicate how patients and families view team functioning. Yet, important gaps exist in our understanding of patient-reported experience and outcomes at the level of the healthcare team. We aimed to examine the influence of individual, team, and organizational characteristics, and role clarity on outcomes of care mediated by team processes in primary healthcare teams that include NPs. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey across six sites representing practices with NPs in Québec, Canada, was conducted between March 2018 and April 2019 as part of a multiple-case study. Patients and families (n = 485; response rate: 53%) completed a validated questionnaire, which included a patient-reported experience measure (PREM) and a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) of team functioning (Cronbach alpha: 0.771 (PROM) to 0.877 (PREM)). We performed logistic regression and mediation analyses to examine relationships between the individual, team, and organizational characteristics, role clarity, and outcomes of care mediated by team processes. RESULTS: Patients and families expressed positive perceptions of team functioning (mean 4.97/6 [SD 0.68]) and outcomes of care (5.08/6 [0.74]). Also, high team processes (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 14.92 [95% CI 8.11 to 27.44]) was a significant predictor of high outcomes of care. Role clarity (indirect effect coefficient ab = 6.48 [95% CI 3.79 to 9.56]), living in an urban area (-1.32 [-2.59 to -0.13]), patient as respondent (-1.43 [-2.80 to -0.14]), and income (1.73 [0.14 to 3.45]) were significant predictors of outcomes of care mediated by team processes. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides key insights on how primary healthcare teams with NPs contribute to team functioning, using a validated instrument consistent with a conceptual framework. Results highlight that high role clarity, living in a non urban area, family as respondent, and adequate income were significant predictors of high outcomes of care mediated by high team processes. Additional research is needed to compare teams with and without NPs in different settings, to further explicate the relationships identified in our study.

L'autonomie décisionnelle d'infirmières de soins intensifs lors du sevrage de la ventilation mécanique : une analyse de concept.

Nurses have a leading role in weaning patients from mechanical ventilation (WMV) given their constant presence and their continuous monitoring. To promote proper WMV, nurses must exercise autonomy and be involved in decision-making. However, in certain care contexts, there is little involvement of nurses. The purpose of this text is to establish the characteristics of the concept of autonomous decision-making applied to nursing during WMV. An analysis of this concept was carried out according to the evolutionary method of Rodgers. The identification of the attributes, antecedents, and consequences made it possible to note ambiguity in the definition of this concept. Nurses use autonomous decision-making for the execution of assigned tasks and when they make decisions according to a pre-prescribed decision-making algorithm. Significant foundations for the decision-making autonomy of critical care nurses during WMV emerged from this analysis : scope of practice, in-depth knowledge of the patient, and commitment to the success of WMV. Participation in interdependent decision-making allows nurses to bring the patient’s perspective into decisions. Avenues of reflection have also emerged, including decisions based on evidence to provide new avenues for autonomous decision-making.

Systematic review of the characteristics of brief team interventions to clarify roles and improve functioning in healthcare teams.

AIM: Describe brief (less than half a day) interventions aimed at improving healthcare team functioning. METHODS: A systematic review on brief team interventions aimed at role clarification and team functioning (PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42018088922). Experimental or quasi-experimental studies were included. Database searches included CINAHL, Medline, EMBASE, PUBMED, Cochrane, RCT Registry-1990 to April 2020 and grey literature. Articles were screened independently by teams of two reviewers. Risk of bias was assessed. Data from the retained articles were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer independently. A narrative synthesis was undertaken. RESULTS: Searches yielded 1928 unique records. Final sample contained twenty papers describing 19 studies, published between 2009 and 2020. Studies described brief training interventions conducted in acute care in-patient settings and included a total of 6338 participants. Participants' socio-demographic information was not routinely reported. Studies met between two to six of the eight risk of bias criteria. Interventions included simulations for technical skills, structured communications and speaking up for non-technical skills and debriefing. Debriefing sessions generally lasted between five to 10 minutes. Debriefing sessions reflected key content areas but it was not always possible to determine the influence of the debriefing session on participants' learning because of the limited information reported. DISCUSSION: Interest in short team interventions is recent. Single two-hour sessions appear to improve technical skills. Three to four 30- to 60-minute training sessions spread out over several weeks with structured facilitation and debriefing appear to improve non-technical skills. Monthly meetings appear to sustain change over time. CONCLUSION: Short team interventions show promise to improve team functioning. Effectiveness of interventions in primary care and the inclusion of patients and families needs to be examined. Primary care teams are structured differently than teams in acute care and they may have different priorities.

Team Functioning And Beliefs About Team Effectiveness In Inter-Professional Teams: Questionnaire Development And Validation.

PURPOSE: Few validated instruments are available to measure team functioning in acute and primary care teams. To address this, we developed a questionnaire measuring healthcare provider perceptions of team effectiveness (Provider-PTE) and assessed its psychometric properties. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Empirical evidence and a conceptual model were used for item generation. The 41-item self-completed questionnaire was developed. A cross-sectional survey of healthcare providers (n=283) across a range of settings was performed. Psychometric properties were assessed for French and English language questionnaires using Cronbach alpha (α) for reliability, the feedback form for face validity, expert opinion for content validity, and the known-group technique for construct validity. Responsiveness was examined by comparing scores in high and low functioning teams. RESULTS: The mean time needed to complete the questionnaire was less than 9 mins. Respondents were typically female (84%), and employed full time (80%) in urban settings (82%). Cronbach α values were as follows: Team Processes = 0.88; PTE-Overall = 0.91; Outcomes = 0.72. Significant differences were found by professional group (p = 0.017), length of time in the team (p = 0.025), and presence of nurse practitioners. Responses to Outcomes varied by employment status (p = 0.017). Differences were identified in high and low functioning teams (p<0.001). Feedback indicated that two questions related to team meetings needed to be added. CONCLUSION: The study produced evidence of validity for English and French language Provider-PTE questionnaires. The revised 43-item instrument represents an important contribution by providing a validated questionnaire to measure team functioning across a range of settings that is consistent with a conceptual framework.

Measuring patient and family perceptions of team processes and outcomes in healthcare teams: questionnaire development and psychometric evaluation.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of validated instruments examining dimensions of team functioning from the perspective of patients and families consistent with a conceptual framework. The study aimed to develop and assess the psychometric properties of the Patient-Perceptions of Team Effectiveness (PTE) questionnaire. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was undertaken in three studies. Data were collected from May-October 2016 for Study 1, April 2018-ongoing for Study 2, and October 2016 to June 2017 for Study 3. Online and paper versions of the self-administered questionnaire were available in English and in French. The initial questionnaire included 41 items. Study 1 included 320 respondents. Reliability was assessed using Cronbach alpha. Face validity (n = 250) was assessed using a structured questionnaire. Content validity was examined using subject matter experts and Spearman's item-total correlations. Construct validity was examined using known group comparisons (i.e., clinical specialty, education, length of follow-up, reason of consultation). Content analysis was used for open-ended questions. RESULTS: The questionnaire took 10 to 15 min to complete. Positive assessments were noted for instructions, formatting, font size and logical ordering of questions. In Study 1, reliability indices for the PTE-Overall, Team Processes and Outcomes subscales ranged from 0.72 to 0.84. Item-total correlations ranged from 0.551 to 0.794 (p <  0.001). Differences were noted between clinical specialties, education, length of follow-up, reason of consultation, low and high functioning teams. No differences were noted between English and French language respondents. Psychometric properties were re-assessed in Study 2 and 3 after unclear questions were reworked. Reliability indices for the subscales ranged from 0.76 to 0.94 and differences remained significant between low and high functioning teams. CONCLUSION: The final 43-item instrument is easy to administer to patients and families. The studies provide evidence of validity to support the propositions in the conceptual framework. The patient-level measures can be aggregated to the team, organizational or system level. The information can be used to assess healthcare team functioning in acute and primary care and determine the role patients and families are playing in teams. Further testing is needed with patients and families who are hospitalized or receiving care from teams in rural areas.