The impact of introducing a care pathway for the treatment of minor paediatrics burns

Communication in Pediatric Critical Care Units: A Review of the Literature

TOPIC

Current communication styles in pediatric critical care units do not often consider the needs of providers, patients, or family members.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The Child Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems score has begun real-world testing and soon will be mandatory and tied to reimbursement. Poor communication in pediatric critical care units can lead to reduced continuity of care, escalated or unnecessary care, and poor outcomes for patients and hospitals. Improving communication in pediatric critical care units is imperative.

PURPOSE OF PAPER

Extant literature was reviewed to assess communication in pediatric critical care from the provider, parent, and patient perspectives. Communication tools were also reviewed.

CONTENT COVERED

Twenty-eight articles met inclusion criteria and were analyzed according to study focus (provider, parent/caregiver, patient, or tool). This review links communication to outcomes related to providers, parents, and patients. Current tools are reviewed to evaluate their effectiveness in addressing communication barriers and to guide future research in communication. Findings indicate that effective communication is challenging in intensive care units despite robust evidence that effective communication improves patient outcomes and quality metrics. Repeated and varied forms of communication, especially written reinforced with verbal communication, seem to have the strongest effect and show promising results. Common barriers nurses face on their units are identified, and solutions are suggested. This review adds to current knowledge by linking communication to measurable outcomes and examining communication barriers and needs specific to pediatric critical care populations from the provider, parent, and patient perspectives.

Identifying and classifying indicators affected by performing clinical pathways in hospitals: a scoping review

AIM

To analyse the evidence regarding indicators affected by clinical pathways (CPW) in hospitals and offer suggestions for conducting comprehensive systematic reviews.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic scoping review and searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, Scopus, OVID, Science Direct, ProQuest, EMBASE and PubMed. We also reviewed the reference lists of included studies. The criteria for inclusion of studies included experimental and quasi-experimental studies, implementing CPW in secondary and tertiary hospitals and investigating at least one indicator. Quality of included studies was assessed by two authors independently using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program for clinical trials and cohort studies and the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool for Quasi-Experimental Studies.

RESULTS

Forty-seven out of 2191 studies met the eligibility and inclusion criteria. The majority of included studies had pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design and had been done in developed countries, especially the United States. The investigation of evidence resulted in identifying 62 indicators which were classified into three categories: input indicators, process and output indicators and outcome indicators. Outcome indicators were more frequent than other indicators. Complication rate, hospital costs and length of hospital stay were dominant in their own category. Indicators such as quality of life and adherence to guidelines have been considered in studies that were done in recent years.

CONCLUSION

Implementing CPW can affect different types of indicators such as input, process, output and outcome indicators, although outcome indicators capture more attention than other indicators. Patient-related indicators were dominant outcome indicators, whereas professional indicators and organizational factors were considered less extensively. WHAT IS KNOWN ABOUT THE TOPIC?: WHAT DOES THIS ARTICLE ADD?