Mobile-enhanced Family Integrated Care for preterm infants: A qualitative study of parents' views

Objective

The Family Integrated Care (FICare) model improves outcomes for preterm infants and parents compared with family-centered care (FCC). FICare with mobile technology (mFICare) may improve uptake and impact. Research on FICare in the United States (US) is scarce and little is known about parents' experience.

Methods

We conducted qualitative interviews with nine parents, exploring their NICU experiences, participation in and perceptions of the mFICare program. A directed content analysis approach was used, and common themes were derived from the data.

Results

Overall, parents had positive NICU experiences and found mFICare helpful in meeting three common parenting priorities: actively caring for their infant, learning how to care for their infant, and learning about the clinical status of their infant. They described alignment and misalignment with mFICare components relative to their personal parenting priorities and offered suggestions for improvement. Nurses were noted to play key roles in providing or facilitating parent support and encouragement to participate in mFICare and parenting activities.

Conclusion

The mFICare program showed potential for parental acceptance and participation in US NICUs.

Innovation

The mFICare model is an innovation in neonatal care that can advance the consistent delivery of NICU family-centered care planning and caregiving.Clinical Trial Registration:NCT03418870 01/02/2018.

Caregiver and provider attitudes toward family-centred rounding in paediatric acute care cardiology

Family-centered rounding has emerged as the gold standard for inpatient paediatrics rounds due to its association with improved family and staff satisfaction and reduction of harmful errors. Little is known about family-centered rounding in subspecialty paediatric settings, including paediatric acute care cardiology.In this qualitative, single centre study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with providers and caregivers eliciting their attitudes toward family-centered rounding. An a priori recruitment approach was used to optimise diversity in reflected opinions. A brief demographic survey was completed by participants. We completed thematic analysis of transcribed interviews using grounded theory.In total, 38 interviews representing the views of 48 individuals (11 providers, 37 caregivers) were completed. Three themes emerged: rounds as a moment of mutual accountability, caregivers' empathy for providers, and providers' objections to family-centered rounding. Providers' objections were further categorised into themes of assumptions about caregivers, caregiver choices during rounds, and risk for exacerbation of bias and inequity.Caregivers and providers in the paediatric acute care cardiology setting echoed some previously described attitudes toward family-centered rounding. Many of the challenges surrounding family-centered rounding might be addressed through access to training for caregivers and providers alike. Hospitals should invest in systems to facilitate family-centered rounding if they choose to implement this model of care as the current state risks erosion of provider-caregiver relationship.

The recent evolution of patient care rounds in pediatric teaching hospitals in the United States and Canada

Introduction: National trends toward empowering and enabling patients and families to take a bigger role in their own medical care and enhanced collaboration between rounding stakeholders have effectuated a new rounding model in the pediatric inpatient setting known as 'Patient- and Family-Centered Rounds/I-PASS,' which has shown to decrease safety events and to improve stakeholders' experience with rounding. Other enhancements to the new model, such as the use of whiteboards, rounding checklists, and facecards, have all been applied to the new model to good effect. Another major enhancement to rounding of late has been the application of a schedule to rounds, which has increased the presence of the nurse and the family during rounds and has improved rounding efficiency without a negative effect on teaching.Objective:  We provide a review of the literature regarding this new rounding model and its effects in the pediatric inpatient setting, as well as a review of the enhancements that have been applied to the new model, the recognized barriers to the implementation of these rounding alterations and the ways in which those barriers have been overcome. Conclusions:  In the pediatric inpatient setting, the 'Patient and Family-Centered Rounds/IPASS' rounding model, as well as enhancements to this new model such as rounding schedules, whiteboards, checklists and facecards, have had a positive effect on stakeholders' experience with rounding, increased patient safety and improved rounding efficiency.  Given these positive effects, these alterations to rounding should be promoted and sustained.PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARYRounding is when a medical care provider, or a team of providers, visits patients in the hospital in order to determine a plan of care and discuss that care with the patient and the patient's family. In teaching hospitals, this involves staff physicians, medical trainees and advanced practice providers. Rounding has changed in the recent past as evolving pressures have increasingly led these teams of providers to talk and make decisions about patients outside the patient's room, which lessens the patient's ability to contribute to decision-making. This also lessens the ability of the patient's nurse to contribute. The recognition of this problem has led to big changes in rounding in children's teaching hospitals, the biggest of which is called 'family-centered rounding.' This involves performing the entirety of rounds in the patients' rooms, directing the discussion toward them in language that they understand, with the active participation of everyone present, including the patient's nurse. Other changes in rounding, designed to improve patients' experiences and decrease medical errors, have made this new rounding model even better. Structured communication during rounds, communication aids such as whiteboards and checklists, and planned times for rounding on each patient ('scheduled rounding') have all successfully been used to improve patients' care and experience in the hospital. This article aims to inform the reader about family-centered rounds and other recent rounding transformations that have proven to increase patient safety and improve their experience while in the hospital, also noting barriers to these changes and how they have been overcome.

Family ward rounds in intensive care: An integrative review of the literature

BACKGROUND

The involvement of family members in the ward rounds is a novel but under-researched family-centered care intervention in adult intensive care units, with limited evidence on the impact it has on patient and family-centered outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

This integrative review aimed to understand how family rounds are implemented in critical care and to appraise the evidence on outcomes for patients, family members, and healthcare professionals.

DESIGN

An integrative review methodological framework permitted the inclusion of all research designs.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE; CINAHL; PsycINFO; Cochrane Library; Web of Science Current Contents Connect; Web of Science-Core Collection; The Joanna Briggs Institute EBP Database; ProQuest Sociological Abstracts; and ProQuest Dissertation and Theses Global, Embase were systematically searched.

REVIEW METHODS

We reviewed studies that referred to or used as an intervention the involvement of family members in daily critical care team rounds. We included primary research in adult intensive care units regardless of patients' length of stay. We excluded patients receiving end-of-life care. We considered any outcome related to the critically ill patient and/or their family member, outcomes related to the healthcare professionals, and outcomes related to clinical and/or nursing treatment. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to appraise the quality of the studies. The review was registered in the Prospero database.

RESULTS

From the 541 articles initially retrieved, 15 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Studies originated from the United States of America and Canada since 2003, and a variety of designs were used. Four before and after studies and a non-randomized experimental study explored the impact of structured family rounds on family and staff satisfaction, showing limited improvement in satisfaction. Six cross-sectional survey studies explored family members' and clinicians' perceptions and demonstrated a positive attitude towards family-centered rounds, but some concerns were raised from the nursing staff. Three qualitative studies and a mixed-methods study identified structural and cultural factors influencing healthcare professionals' and families' acceptance of family rounds. Most studies were of poor to moderate quality, with limited confidence in the outcomes reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Most studies reported improved family satisfaction as the main outcome. Future research should focus on longitudinal patient and family-centered outcomes, including mental health outcomes, and on qualitative data to understand the processes, barriers, and facilitators to implement family-centered rounds in intensive care units.

Family-Centered Rounds: Past, Present, and Future

Bedside rounds have evolved concurrently with hospitalist medicine and patient-centered care. Family-centered rounds are the foundation of effective communication in the in-patient pediatric setting. Participant perspectives (family members, patients, nurses, faculty, and trainees) on family-centered rounds differ and goals may not always align. Further, the practical components of how rounds are conducted varies and have continued opportunities for improvement. This article summarizes the most recent experience with rounds in an attempt to identify unified and effective strategies moving forward.

Multi-stakeholder collaboration in the redesign of family-centered rounds process

A human factors approach to healthcare system redesign emphasizes the involvement of multiple healthcare stakeholders (e.g., patients and families, healthcare providers) in the redesign process. This study explores the experience of multiple stakeholders with collaboration in a healthcare system redesign project. Interviews were conducted with ten stakeholder representatives who participated in the redesign of the family-centered rounds process in a pediatric hospital. Qualitative interview data were analyzed using a phenomenological approach. A model of collaborative healthcare system redesign was developed, which defined four phases (i.e., setup of the redesign team, preparation for meetings, collaboration in meetings, follow-up after meetings) and two outcomes (i.e., team outcomes, redesign outcomes) of the collaborative process. Challenges to multi-stakeholder collaboration in healthcare system redesign, such as need to represent all relevant stakeholders, scheduling of meetings and managing different perspectives, were identified.

Family-centered rounds

Family-centered rounds (FCRs) are multidisciplinary rounds that involve medical teams partnering with patients and families in daily medical decision-making. Multiple FCR benefits have been identified including improving patient satisfaction, communication, discharge planning, medical education, and patient safety. Main barriers to FCRs are variability in attending rounding, duration of rounds, physical constrains of large teams and small rooms, specific and sensitive patient conditions, and lack of training of residents, students, and faculty on how to conduct effective and effecient FCRs. In the last decade, many programs have incorporated FCRs into daily practice due to their multiple perceived benefits. Future FCRs should focus on better operationalizing of FCRs and reporting on objective outcomes measures such as improved communication, coordination, and patient satisfaction that are crucial for healthcare.