Factors influencing nurses' use of sedation interruptions in a critical care unit: a descriptive qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: This study examined critical care nurses', physicians', and allied health professionals' perceptions of factors that support, inhibit, or limit the use of sedation interruption (SI) to improve the use of this integral component of care for mechanically ventilated patients. METHOD: We conducted a theory-based, descriptive qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with critical care registered nurses, respiratory therapists, a pharmacist, and a physician in a hospital in Ontario, Canada. The interview guide and analysis were informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework and transcripts were analyzed using content analysis. RESULTS: We identified 9 facilitators and 20 barriers to SI use by nurses. Facilitators included the innovation (importance of protocols) and potential adopters (comfort with the skill). The barriers were the potential adopters' (nurses) knowledge gaps regarding the performance and goal of SI and the practice environment (lack of time, availability of extra staff, and lack of multidisciplinary rounds). CONCLUSION: This study identified facilitators and barriers to SI for mechanically ventilated patients. Implementation efforts must address barriers associated with nurses, the environment, and contextual factors. A team-based approach is essential, as the absence of interprofessional rounds is a significant barrier to the appropriate use or non-use of SI. Future research can focus on the indications, contraindications, and goals of SI, emphasizing a shared appreciation for these factors across disciplines. Nursing capacity to manage a patient waking up from sedation is necessary for point-of-care adherence; future research should focus on the best ways to do so. Implementation study designs should use theory and evidence-based determinants of SI to bridge the evidence-to-practice gap. SPANISH ABSTRACT: http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A178.

Triage Decision-Making in Interdisciplinary Pediatric Chronic Pain Programs.

BACKGROUND: Interdisciplinary pediatric chronic pain programs are ideal treatment settings for youth with chronic pain who are complex from a biopsychosocial perspective. There is currently no evidence-based clinical decision support to guide nurses triaging patients to such programs, which increases the risk for haphazard triage decisions. AIMS: To explore and describe the decision-making practices of and contextual influences on nurses triaging patients to interdisciplinary pediatric chronic pain programs. DESIGN: A qualitative exploratory descriptive design. SETTINGS: Interdisciplinary Pediatric Chronic Pain Programs. PARTICIPANTS/SUBJECTS: In all, 12 nurses across 11 different interdisciplinary pediatric chronic pain programs participated in this study. METHODS: Individual, semi-structured interviews were conducted, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using concurrent content analysis, guided by the Cognitive Continuum Theory and the Theoretical Domains Framework. RESULTS: Findings focused on the complexity of the pediatric chronic pain population and the leading role nurses play in triage without evidence-based guidance. Analysis generated three prominent themes: (1) nurse-led triage determinants; (2) process of triage decision-making; and (3) external influences on triage decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Triage decision making in the setting of interdisciplinary pediatric chronic pain programs is complex and often led by nurses. There is a desire amongst nurses to adopt an evidence-based clinical decision support triage tool (CDS), which may streamline the referral and triage process and foster a system whereby patients in highest need for interdisciplinary care are best prioritized.

Real world outcomes of distributing Lucira Check-It® COVID self-tests in Ontario, Canada: the GetaKit COVID study.

BACKGROUND: In Ontario, Canada we developed and implemented an online screening algorithm for the distribution of HIV self-tests, known as GetaKit. During the COVID pandemic, we adapted the GetaKit algorithm to screen for COVID based on population and infection data and distributed COVID rt-LAMP self-tests (using the Lucira Check-It®) to eligible participants. METHODS: GetaKit/COVID was a prospective observational study that occurred over a 7-month period from September 2021 to April 2022. All potential participants completed an online registration and risk assessment, including demographic information, COVID symptoms and risk factors, and vaccination status. Bivariate comparisons were performed for three outcomes: results reporting status, vaccination status, and COVID diagnosis status. Data were analysed using Chi-Square for categorial covariates and Independent Samples T-Test and Mann-Whitney U test for continuous covariates. Bivariate logistic regression models were applied to examine associations between the covariates and outcomes. RESULTS: During the study period, we distributed 6469 COVID self-tests to 4160 eligible participants; 46% identified as Black, Indigenous or a Person of Colour (BIPOC). Nearly 70% of participants reported their COVID self-test results; 304 of which were positive. Overall, 91% also reported being vaccinated against COVID. Statistical analysis found living with five or fewer people, having tested for COVID previously, and being fully vaccinated were positive factors in results reporting. For COVID vaccination, people from large urban centers, who identified their ethnicity as white, and who reported previous COVID testing were more likely to be fully vaccinated. Finally, being identified as a contact of someone who had tested positive for COVID and the presence of COVID-related symptoms were found to be positive factors in diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: While most participants who accessed this service were vaccinated against COVID and the majority of diagnoses were identified in participants who had symptoms of, or an exposure to, COVID, our program was able to appropriately link participants to recommended follow-up based on reported risks and results. These findings highlight the utility of online screening algorithms to provide health services, particularly for persons with historical barriers to healthcare access, such as BIPOC or lower-income groups.

A scoping review reveals candidate quality indicators of knowledge translation and implementation science practice tools.

OBJECTIVES: To identify candidate quality indicators from existing tools that provide guidance on how to practice knowledge translation and implemenation science (KT practice tools) across KT domains (dissemination, implementation, sustainability, and scalability). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a scoping review using the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis. We systematically searched multiple electronic databases and the gray literature. Documents were independently screened, selected, and extracted by pairs of reviewers. Data about the included articles, KT practice tools, and candidate quality indicators were analyzed, categorized, and summarized descriptively. RESULTS: Of 43,060 titles and abstracts that were screened from electronic databases and gray literature, 850 potentially relevant full-text articles were identified, and 253 articles were included in the scoping review. Of these, we identified 232 unique KT practice tools from which 27 unique candidate quality indicators were generated. The identified candidate quality indicators were categorized according to the development (n = 17), evaluation (n = 5) and adaptation (n = 3) of the tools, and engagement of knowledge users (n = 2). No tools were identified that appraised the quality of KT practice tools. CONCLUSIONS: The development of a quality appraisal instrument of KT practice tools is needed. The results will be further refined and finalized in order to develop a quality appraisal instrument for KT practice tools.

Indicators to measure implementation and sustainability of nursing best practice guidelines: A mixed methods analysis.

Background: The use of best practice guidelines (BPGs) has the potential to decrease the gap between best evidence and nursing and healthcare practices. We conducted an exploratory mixed method study to identify strategies, processes, and indicators relevant to the implementation and sustainability of two Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario (RNAO) BPGs at Best Practice Spotlight Organizations® (BPSOs). Methods: Our study had four phases. In Phase 1, we triangulated two qualitative studies: a) secondary analysis of 126 narrative reports detailing implementation progress from 21 BPSOs spanning four sectors to identify strategies and processes used to support the implementation and sustainability of BPGs and b) interviews with 25 guideline implementers to identify additional strategies and processes. In Phase 2, we evaluated correlations between strategies and processes identified from the narrative reports and one process and one outcome indicator for each of the guideline. In Phase 3, the results from Phases 1 and 2 informed indicator development, led by an expert panel. In Phase 4, the indicators were assessed internally by RNAO staff and externally by Ontario Health Teams. A survey was used to validate proposed indicators to determine relevance, feasibility, readability, and usability with knowledge users and BPSO leaders. Results: Triangulation of the two qualitative studies revealed 46 codes of implementation and sustainability of BPGs, classified into eight overarching themes: Stakeholder Engagement, Practice Interventions, Capacity Building, Evidence-Based Culture, Leadership, Evaluation & Monitoring, Communication, and Governance. A total of 28 structure, process, or outcome indicators were developed. End users and BPSO leaders were agreeable with the indicators according to the validation survey. Conclusions: Many processes and strategies can influence the implementation and sustainability of BPGs at BPSOs. We have developed indicators that can help BPSOs promote evidence-informed practice implementation of BPGs.

The Implementation in Context (ICON) Framework: A meta-framework of context domains, attributes and features in healthcare.

BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence that context mediates the effects of implementation interventions intended to increase healthcare professionals' use of research evidence in clinical practice. However, conceptual clarity about what comprises context is elusive. The purpose of this study was to advance conceptual clarity on context by developing the Implementation in Context Framework, a meta-framework of the context domains, attributes and features that can facilitate or hinder healthcare professionals' use of research evidence and the effectiveness of implementation interventions in clinical practice. METHODS: We conducted a meta-synthesis of data from three interrelated studies: (1) a concept analysis of published literature on context (n = 70 studies), (2) a secondary analysis of healthcare professional interviews (n = 145) examining context across 11 unique studies and (3) a descriptive qualitative study comprised of interviews with heath system stakeholders (n = 39) in four countries to elicit their tacit knowledge on the attributes and features of context. A rigorous protocol was followed for the meta-synthesis, resulting in development of the Implementation in Context Framework. Following this meta-synthesis, the framework was further refined through feedback from experts in context and implementation science. RESULTS: In the Implementation in Context Framework, context is conceptualized in three levels: micro (individual), meso (organizational), and macro (external). The three levels are composed of six contextual domains: (1) actors (micro), (2) organizational climate and structures (meso), (3) organizational social behaviour (meso), (4) organizational response to change (meso), (5) organizational processes (meso) and (6) external influences (macro). These six domains contain 22 core attributes of context and 108 features that illustrate these attributes. CONCLUSIONS: The Implementation in Context Framework is the only meta-framework of context available to guide implementation efforts of healthcare professionals. It provides a comprehensive and critically needed understanding of the context domains, attributes and features relevant to healthcare professionals' use of research evidence in clinical practice. The Implementation in Context Framework can inform implementation intervention design and delivery to better interpret the effects of implementation interventions, and pragmatically guide implementation efforts that enhance evidence uptake and sustainability by healthcare professionals.

Efficacy of sustained knowledge translation (KT) interventions in chronic disease management in older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of complex interventions.

BACKGROUND: Chronic disease management (CDM) through sustained knowledge translation (KT) interventions ensures long-term, high-quality care. We assessed implementation of KT interventions for supporting CDM and their efficacy when sustained in older adults. METHODS: Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis engaging 17 knowledge users using integrated KT. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including adults (> 65 years old) with chronic disease(s), their caregivers, health and/or policy-decision makers receiving a KT intervention to carry out a CDM intervention for at least 12 months (versus other KT interventions or usual care). INFORMATION SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from each database's inception to March 2020. OUTCOME MEASURES: Sustainability, fidelity, adherence of KT interventions for CDM practice, quality of life (QOL) and quality of care (QOC). Data extraction, risk of bias (ROB) assessment: We screened, abstracted and appraised articles (Effective Practice and Organisation of Care ROB tool) independently and in duplicate. DATA SYNTHESIS: We performed both random-effects and fixed-effect meta-analyses and estimated mean differences (MDs) for continuous and odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous data. RESULTS: We included 158 RCTs (973,074 participants [961,745 patients, 5540 caregivers, 5789 providers]) and 39 companion reports comprising 329 KT interventions, involving patients (43.2%), healthcare providers (20.7%) or both (10.9%). We identified 16 studies described as assessing sustainability in 8.1% interventions, 67 studies as assessing adherence in 35.6% interventions and 20 studies as assessing fidelity in 8.7% of the interventions. Most meta-analyses suggested that KT interventions improved QOL, but imprecisely (36 item Short-Form mental [SF-36 mental]: MD 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] [- 1.25, 3.47], 14 RCTs, 5876 participants, I2 = 96%; European QOL-5 dimensions: MD 0.01, 95% CI [- 0.01, 0.02], 15 RCTs, 6628 participants, I2 = 25%; St George's Respiratory Questionnaire: MD - 2.12, 95% CI [- 3.72, - 0.51] 44 12 RCTs, 2893 participants, I2 = 44%). KT interventions improved QOC (OR 1.55, 95% CI [1.29, 1.85], 12 RCTS, 5271 participants, I2 = 21%). CONCLUSIONS: KT intervention sustainability was infrequently defined and assessed. Sustained KT interventions have the potential to improve QOL and QOC in older adults with CDM. However, their overall efficacy remains uncertain and it varies by effect modifiers, including intervention type, chronic disease number, comorbidities, and participant age. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018084810.

Facilitators and Barriers to Nurses Screening for Frailty in Acute Care in a Provincial Health-Care System: a Survey Study Guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework.

Background: Older adults living with frailty represent the largest population of hospitalized patients in Canada, but they do not always receive the quality of care needed. Nurses are well-positioned to screen for frailty, but current frailty screening practices are poorly understood. Methods: A cross-sectional survey study was conducted over a six-week period with nurses from Alberta, Canada working in acute care with older adults. Demographics were descriptively reported. Frailty screening methods were quantified on 5-point frequency scales, reported descriptively and compared by practice area using linear regression. The top-five mean scores from a 43-item, 6-point Likert-type questionnaire based on the Theoretical Domains Framework were compared by practice area. Results: Frailty screening by clinical impression was "usually" used (median = 4, IQR = 4-5), while tools were "rarely" used (median = 2, IQR = 1-3). Medical and/or surgical nursing had higher general frailty screening tool use (ß = 0.81, r = .31, p < .001), but no significant (p > .05) differences for using clinical impression, or preference of screening method. The top facilitator was the disbelief that frailty screening negatively impacts relationships with older adults. The top barrier was belief that conducting frailty screening was routine. Nursing practice area influenced frailty screening beliefs. Conclusions: There is an opportunity to implement frailty screening tools into the nursing practice of Alberta' nurses working in acute care. Frailty screening tools that become routine have greater likelihood for utilization. Nursing practice areas may have unique situations that require tailored approached to tool implementation.

Exploring implementation processes of a parent-targeted educational video for improving newborn pain treatment: A sequential exploratory mixed-methods study.

Despite known analgesic effects of breastfeeding (BF), skin-to-skin care (SSC), and sweet solutions (sucrose) for newborns, these interventions remain underutilized. Our team produced a five-minute parent-targeted video (BSweet2Babies) demonstrating BF, SSC, and sucrose during newborn blood sampling. We conducted a sequential exploratory mixed-methods study with eight maternal-newborn units across Ontario, Canada to identify barriers and facilitators to implementing the video and the three pain management strategies.Over a 6-month period, data collection included 15 telephone interviews, two email communications, and three community of practice teleconferences with the participating sites (n = 8). We used the Theoretical Domains Framework as the coding matrix. Participants discussed integrating the video in prenatal education and the importance of involving leadership when planning for practice change. Key barriers included lack of comfort with parental presence, perception of high complexity of the strategies, short postpartum stays, competing priorities, and interprofessional challenges. Key facilitators included alignment with the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative, modeling by Lactation Consultants, and frequent reminders.

Insights from using an outcomes measurement properties search filter and conducting citation searches to locate psychometric articles of tools used to measure context attributes.

OBJECTIVES: To describe our experience with using a methodological outcomes measurement search filter (precise and sensitive versions of a filter designed to locate articles that report on psychometric properties of measurement tools) and citation searches to locate psychometric articles for tools that can be used to measure context attributes. To compare the precise filter when used alone and with reference list checking to citation searching according to number of records found, precision, and sensitivity. RESULTS: Using the precise filter, we located 130 of 150 (86.6%) psychometric articles related to 22 of 31 (71.0%) tools that potentially measured an attribute of context. In a subset of six tools, the precise filter alone was more precise than searching with the precise filter combined with reference list searching, or citation searching alone. The precise filter combined with reference list checking was the most sensitive search method examined. Overall, we found the precise filter helpful for our project as it decreased record screening time. For non-patient reported outcomes tools, we had less success with locating psychometric articles using the precise filter because some psychometric articles were not indexed in PubMed. More research that systematically evaluates database searching methods is needed to validate our findings.

Factors Associated With Residents' Responsive Behaviors Toward Staff in Long-Term Care Homes: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: When staff experience responsive behaviors from residents, this can lead to decreased quality of work life and lower quality of care in long-term care homes. We synthesized research on factors associated with resident responsive behaviors directed toward care staff and characteristics of interventions to reduce the behaviors. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods systematic review with quantitative and qualitative research. We searched 12 bibliographic databases and "gray" literature, using 2 keywords (long-term care, responsive behaviors) and their synonyms. Pairs of reviewers independently completed screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. We developed a coding scheme using the ecological model as an organizing structure and prepared narrative summaries for each factor. RESULTS: From 86 included studies (57 quantitative, 28 qualitative, 1 mixed methods), multiple factors emerged, such as staff training background (individual level), staff approaches to care (interpersonal level), leadership and staffing resources (institutional level), and racism and patriarchy (societal level). Quantitative and qualitative results each provided key insights, such as qualitative results pertaining to leadership responses to reports of behaviors, and quantitative findings on the impact of staff approaches to care on behaviors. Effects of interventions (n = 14) to reduce the behaviors were inconclusive. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: We identified the need for an enhanced understanding of the interrelationships among factors associated with resident responsive behaviors toward staff and processes leading to the behaviors. To address these gaps and to inform theory-based effective interventions for preventing or mitigating responsive behaviors, we suggest intervention studies with systematic process evaluations.

Changes in Health and Well-Being of Nursing Home Managers from a Prepandemic Baseline in February 2020 to December 2021.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate changes in mental health and well-being (eg, quality of work life, health, intention to leave) among nursing home managers from a February 2020 prepandemic baseline to December 2021 in Alberta, Canada. DESIGN: Repeated cross-sectional survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A random sample of nursing homes (n = 35) in urban areas of Alberta was selected on 3 strata (region, size, ownership). Care managers were invited to participate if they (1) managed a unit, (2) worked there for at least 3 months, and (3) worked at least 6 shifts per month. METHODS: We measured various mental health and well-being outcomes, including job satisfaction (Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire Job Satisfaction Subscale), burnout (Maslach Burnout Inventory-exhaustion, cynicism, efficacy), organizational citizenship behaviors (constructive efforts by individuals to implement changes to improve performance), mental and physical health (Short Form-8 Health Survey), burden of worry, and intention to leave. We use mixed effects regression to examine changes at the survey time points, controlling for staffing and resident acuity. RESULTS: The final sample included 181 care managers (87 in the pre-COVID survey; 94 in the COVID survey). Response rates were 66.9% and 82.5% for the pre-COVID and COVID surveys, respectively. In the regression analysis, we found statistically significant negative changes in job satisfaction (mean difference -0.26, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.06; P = .011), cynicism (mean difference 0.43, 95% CI 0.02-0.84; P = .041), exhaustion (mean difference 0.84, 95% CI 0.41-1.27; P < .001), and SF-8 mental health (mean difference -6.49, 95% CI -9.60 to -3.39; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Mental health and well-being of nursing home managers worsened during the pandemic, potentially placing them at risk for leaving their jobs and in need of improved support. These findings should be a major concern for policy makers, particularly given serious prepandemic workforce shortages. Ongoing assessment and support of this understudied group are needed.

A systematic review and critical appraisal of guidelines and their recommendations for sedation interruptions in adult mechanically ventilated patients.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of the review were to (i) assess the methodological quality of all accessible and published guidelines and care bundles that offer a recommendation related to sedation interruptions, using the AGREE-II instrument, to (ii) determine what is the recommended best practice for sedation interruptions from the available guidelines, and then to have (iii) a closer inspection of the overall credibility and applicability of the recommendations using the AGREE-REX instrument. This review will benefit the outcomes of critically ill patients and the multidisciplinary team responsible for the care of mechanically ventilated adults with continuous medication infusions by providing a synthesis of the recommended action(s), actor(s), contextual information, target(s), and timing related to sedation interruptions from current best practice. REVIEW METHOD USED: We conducted a systematic review. DATA SOURCES: We applied a peer-reviewed search strategy to four electronic databases from 2010 to November 2021-MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews-and included grey literature. REVIEW METHOD: Findings are reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses checklist. We assessed overall quality using the validated Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II and AGREE Recommendation Excellence tools. RESULTS: We identified 11 clinical practice guidelines and care bundles comprising 15 recommendations related to sedation interruption. There are three key findings: (i) deficiencies exist with the methodological quality of included guidelines, (ii) sedation interruption is recommended practice for the care of adult mechanically ventilated patients, and (iii) the current evidence is of low quality, which impacts overall credibility and applicability of the recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Sedation interruptions are currently best practice for adult mechanically ventilated patients; however, the available guidelines and recommendations have several deficiencies. Future research is needed to further understand the role of the nurse and other actors to enact this practice.

Validity, reliability, and acceptability of the Evidence-Informed Decision-Making (EIDM) competence measure.

Valid, reliable, and acceptable tools for assessing self-reported competence in evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) are required to provide insight into the current status of EIDM knowledge, skills, attitudes/beliefs, and behaviours for registered nurses working in public health. The purpose of this study was to assess the validity, reliability, and acceptability of the EIDM Competence Measure. A psychometric study design was employed guided by the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing and general measurement development principles. All registered nurses working across 16 public health units in Ontario, Canada were invited to complete the newly developed EIDM Competence Measure via an online survey. The EIDM Competence Measure is a self-reported tool consisting of four EIDM subscales: 1) knowledge; 2) skills; 3) attitudes/beliefs; and 4) behaviours. Acceptability was measured by completion time and percentage of missing data of the original 40-item tool. The internal structure of the tool was first assessed through item-subscale total and item-item correlations within subscales for potential item reduction of the original 40-item tool. Following item reduction which resulted in a revised 27-item EIDM Competence Measure, a principal component analysis using an oblique rotation was performed to confirm the four subscale structure. Validity based on relationships to other variables was assessed by exploring associations between EIDM competence attributes and individual factors (e.g., years of nursing experience, education) and organizational factors (e.g., resource allocation). Internal reliability within each subscale was analyzed using Cronbach's alphas. Across 16 participating public health units, 201 nurses (mean years as a registered nurse = 18.1, predominantly female n = 197; 98%) completed the EIDM Competence Measure. Overall missing data were minimal as 93% of participants completed the entire original 40-item tool (i.e., no missing data), with 7% of participants having one or more items with missing data. Only one participant (0.5%) had >10% of missing data (i.e., more than 4 out of 40 items with data missing). Mean completion time was 7 minutes and 20 seconds for the 40-item tool. Extraction of a four-factor model based on the 27-item version of the scale showed substantial factor loadings (>0.4) that aligned with the four EIDM subscales of knowledge, skills, attitudes/beliefs, and behaviours. Significant relationships between EIDM competence subscale scores and education, EIDM training, EIDM project involvement, and supportive organizational culture were observed. Cronbach's alphas exceeded minimum standards for all subscales: knowledge (α = 0.96); skills (α = 0.93); attitudes/beliefs (α = 0.80); and behaviours (α = 0.94).

The effectiveness of champions in implementing innovations in health care: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Champions have been documented in the literature as an important strategy for implementation, yet their effectiveness has not been well synthesized in the health care literature. The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether champions, tested in isolation from other implementation strategies, are effective at improving innovation use or outcomes in health care. METHODS: The JBI systematic review method guided this study. A peer-reviewed search strategy was applied to eight electronic databases to identify relevant articles. We included all published articles and unpublished theses and dissertations that used a quantitative study design to evaluate the effectiveness of champions in implementing innovations within health care settings. Two researchers independently completed study selection, data extraction, and quality appraisal. We used content analysis and vote counting to synthesize our data. RESULTS: After screening 7566 records titles and abstracts and 2090 full text articles, we included 35 studies in our review. Most of the studies (71.4%) operationalized the champion strategy by the presence or absence of a champion. In a subset of seven studies, five studies found associations between exposure to champions and increased use of best practices, programs, or technological innovations at an organizational level. In other subsets, the evidence pertaining to use of champions and innovation use by patients or providers, or at improving outcomes was either mixed or scarce. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a small body of literature reporting an association between use of champions and increased instrumental use of innovations by organizations. However, more research is needed to determine causal relationship between champions and innovation use and outcomes. Even though there are no reported adverse effects in using champions, opportunity costs may be associated with their use. Until more evidence becomes available about the effectiveness of champions at increasing innovation use and outcomes, the decision to deploy champions should consider the needs and resources of the organization and include an evaluation plan. To further our understanding of champions' effectiveness, future studies should (1) use experimental study designs in conjunction with process evaluations, (2) describe champions and their activities and (3) rigorously evaluate the effectiveness of champions' activities. REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/ba3d2 ). Registered on November 15, 2020.

Impact of Donation Physicians on Deceased Organ Donation: A Systematic Review.

Background: An emerging strategy to increase deceased organ donation is to use dedicated donation physicians to champion organ donation. We sought to conduct a systematic review of the effectiveness of donation physicians in improving organ donation outcomes. Objective: A systematic review was conducted following Cochrane principles. MEDLINE, Embase, and CINHAL databases were searched from inception to March 26, 2020. Methods: Quantitative studies examining the effects of donation physicians on all deceased organ donation outcomes were considered for inclusion. Review articles, editorials and opinion articles, and case studies were excluded. Study selection was completed independently by 2 team members; all discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Two team members independently extracted data from studies. Results: A total of 1017 studies were screened, and 12 met inclusion criteria. Included studies were published between 1994 and 2019. Half used an interrupted time series design (n = 6; 50%), 3 (25%) were cohort studies, and 3 (25%) used a before-and-after study design. Outcomes (reported in greater than 50% of included articles) included consent/refusal rate (n = 8; 67%), number of potential donors (n = 7; 58%), and number of actual donors (n = 7; 58%). Across studies and design types, there was an increase in potential organ donors ranging from 8% to 143% (Mdn = 33%), an increase in actual organ donors from 15% to 113% (Mdn = 27%), an increase in donor consent rate from -3% to 258% (Mdn = 12%), and an increase in deceased donor transplants from 13% to 24% (Mdn = 19%) following the introduction of donation physicians. Conclusions: Donation physicians have the potential to significantly improve deceased organ donation. Further implementation and evaluation of donation physician programs is warranted. However, implementation should be undertaken with a clear plan for a methodologically rigorous evaluation of outcomes.

Contexte: Le recours à des médecins responsables du don d'organes est une stratégie émergente qui vise à favoriser les dons d'organes après le décès. Nous avons voulu vérifier son efficacité par le biais d'une revue systématique. Sources: La revue systématique a été réalisée conformément aux principes de Cochrane. Les bases de données MEDLINE, Embase et CINHAL ont fait l'objet d'une recherche depuis leur création jusqu'au 26 mars 2020. Méthodologie: Ont été sélectionnées les études quantitatives mesurant l'effet des médecins responsables du don d'organes sur tous les résultats de dons d'organes provenant de personnes décédées. Les articles de revue, éditoriaux, articles d'opinion et études de cas ont été exclus. Deux membres de l'équipe ont procédé de façon indépendante à la sélection des études et à l'extraction des données; les divergences ont été résolues par consensus. Résultats: Des 1 017 études sélectionnées, 12 satisfaisaient aux critères d'inclusion. Les études incluses avaient été publiées entre 1994 et 2019. La moitié des études incluses avait utilisé un modèle de série chronologique interrompu (n = 6; 50 %), trois (25 %) étaient des études de cohorte et trois (25 %) avaient une conception d'étude « avant-après ¼. Les résultats (rapportés dans plus de 50 % des articles inclus) comprenaient le taux de consentement/refus (n = 8; 67 %), le nombre de donneurs potentiels (n = 7; 58 %) et le nombre de donneurs réels (n = 7; 58 %). Après l'introduction de médecins responsables du don d'organes, selon l'étude et le type de conception, on a observé une augmentation allant de 8 à 143 % (augmentation médiane [AM]: 33 %) du nombre de donneurs potentiels, de 15 à 113 % (AM: 27 %) du nombre réel de donneurs, de -3 à 258 % (AM: 12 %) du taux de consentement et de 13 à 24 % (AM: 19 %) du nombre de transplantations d'organes provenant de donneurs décédés. Conclusion: L'introduction de médecins responsables du don d'organes est susceptible d'améliorer significativement le don d'organes après le décès. Il est justifié de poursuivre la mise en œuvre et l'évaluation des programmes intégrant des médecins responsables du don d'organes. La mise en œuvre doit cependant être entreprise avec un plan clair visant une évaluation méthodique et rigoureuse des résultats.

Elevated Sound Levels in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: What Is Causing the Problem?

BACKGROUND: Premature and sick neonates may require weeks of hospitalization in a noisy neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) environment with sound levels that may reach 120 decibels. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends a maximum sound level of 45 decibels. PURPOSE: To measure sound levels in a level III NICU and to describe contributing environmental factors. METHODS: Descriptive quantitative study. Sound levels were measured using a portable sound meter in an open-bay level III NICU. Contributing environmental factors were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: Mean sound levels for day, evening, and night shifts were 83.5, 83, and 80.9 decibels, respectively. Each period of time exceeded the recommended guidelines 90% of the time and was almost double the American Academy of Pediatrics' recommendation. Multiple linear regression findings demonstrated significant factors associated with elevated sound levels including number of neonates, number of people, number of alarms, acuity level, and shift type. Observational data explain 14.5% of elevated sound levels. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: An understanding of baseline sound levels and contributing environmental factors is the first step in developing strategies to mitigate excessive noise in the NICU. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Research should focus on effective and sustainable ways to reduce sound levels in the NICU, including inside the isolette, in order to provide an environment that is conducive to optimal growth and neurodevelopment for preterm and sick infants.

Inappropriate use of clinical practices in Canada: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Inappropriate health care leads to negative patient experiences, poor health outcomes and inefficient use of resources. We aimed to conduct a systematic review of inappropriately used clinical practices in Canada. METHODS: We searched multiple bibliometric databases and grey literature to identify inappropriately used clinical practices in Canada between 2007 and 2021. Two team members independently screened citations, extracted data and assessed methodological quality. Findings were synthesized in 2 categories: diagnostics and therapeutics. We reported ranges of proportions of inappropriate use for all practices. Medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs), based on the percentage of patients not receiving recommended practices (underuse) or receiving practices not recommended (overuse), were calculated. All statistics are at the study summary level. RESULTS: We included 174 studies, representing 228 clinical practices and 28 900 762 patients. The median proportion of inappropriate care, as assessed in the studies, was 30.0% (IQR 12.0%-56.6%). Underuse (median 43.9%, IQR 23.8%-66.3%) was more frequent than overuse (median 13.6%, IQR 3.2%-30.7%). The most frequently investigated diagnostics were glycated hemoglobin (underused, range 18.0%-85.7%, n = 9) and thyroid-stimulating hormone (overused, range 3.0%-35.1%, n = 5). The most frequently investigated therapeutics were statin medications (underused, range 18.5%-71.0%, n = 6) and potentially inappropriate medications (overused, range 13.5%-97.3%, n = 9). INTERPRETATION: We have provided a summary of inappropriately used clinical practices in Canadian health care systems. Our findings can be used to support health care professionals and quality agencies to improve patient care and safety in Canada.

Barriers and Enablers to Early Identification, Referral and Access to Geriatric Rehabilitation Post-Hip Fracture: A Theory-Based Descriptive Qualitative Study.

Background: Geriatric hip fracture patients often experience gaps in care including variability in the timing and the choice of an appropriate setting for rehabilitation following hip fracture surgery. Many guidelines recommend standardized processes, including timely access of no later than day 6 to rehabilitation services. A pathway for early identification, referral and access to geriatric rehabilitation post-hip fracture was created to facilitate the implementation. The study aimed to describe the barriers and enablers prior to the implementation of this pathway. Methods: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study consisting of semi-structured interviews with geriatric hip fracture patients (n = 8), caregivers (n = 1), administrators (n = 12) and clinicians (n = 17) in 2 orthopaedics units and a geriatric rehabilitation service. Responses were analysed using a systematic approach, and overarching themes describing the barriers and enablers were identified. Results: The clinicians' and administrators' top barriers to implementation of the pathway were competing demands (n = 24); lack of bed availability, community resources and funding (n = 19); and the need for extended hours and increased staff (n = 16). The top 3 enablers were clear communication with patients (n = 27), awareness of the benefits of geriatric rehabilitation (n = 24) and the need for education and resources to properly use the pathway (n = 15). Common barriers among patients and caregivers included lack of care coordination, overcoming some of their own specific challenges during their transition, gaps in the information they received before discharge, not knowing what questions to ask and lack of resources. Despite these barriers, patients were generally pleased with their transition from the hospital to geriatric rehabilitation. Conclusion: We identified and described key barriers and enablers to early identification, referral and access to geriatric rehabilitation post-hip fracture. These influencing factors provide a basis for the development of a standardized pathway aimed at improving access to rehabilitative care for geriatric hip fracture patients.