Dataset Information

Teach-back: A systematic review of implementation and impacts.

ABSTRACT: Patients often have difficulty comprehending or recalling information given to them by their healthcare providers. Use of 'teach-back' has been shown to improve patients' knowledge and self-care abilities, however there is little guidance for healthcare services seeking to embed teach-back in their setting. This review aims to synthesize evidence about the translation of teach-back into practice including mode of delivery, use of implementation strategies and effectiveness. We searched Ovid Medline, CINAHL, Embase and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies reporting the use of teach-back as an educational intervention, published up to July 2019. Two reviewers independently extracted study data and assessed methodologic quality. Implementation strategies were extracted into distinct categories established in the Implementation Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project. Overall, 20 studies of moderate quality were included in this review (four rated high, nine rated moderate, seven rated weak). Studies were heterogeneous in terms of setting, population and outcomes. In most studies (n = 15), teach-back was delivered as part of a simple and structured educational approach. Implementation strategies were infrequently reported (n = 10 studies). The most used implementation strategies were training and education of stakeholders (n = 8), support for clinicians (n = 6) and use of audits and provider feedback (n = 4). Use of teach-back proved effective in 19 of the 20 studies, ranging from learning-related outcomes (e.g. knowledge recall and retention) to objective health-related outcomes (e.g. hospital re-admissions, quality of life). Teach-back was found to be effective across a wide range of settings, populations and outcome measures. While its mode of delivery is well-defined, strategies to support its translation into practice are not often described. Use of implementation strategies such as training and education of stakeholders and supporting clinicians during implementation may improve the uptake and sustainability of teach-back and achieve positive outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Talevski J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7156054 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Teach-back: A systematic review of implementation and impacts.

Talevski Jason J Wong Shee Anna A Rasmussen Bodil B Kemp Georgie G Beauchamp Alison A

PloS one 20200414 4

Patients often have difficulty comprehending or recalling information given to them by their healthcare providers. Use of 'teach-back' has been shown to improve patients' knowledge and self-care abilities, however there is little guidance for healthcare services seeking to embed teach-back in their setting. This review aims to synthesize evidence about the translation of teach-back into practice including mode of delivery, use of implementation strategies and effectiveness. We searched Ovid Medl ...[more]

PMID: 32287296

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Teach Back is a health communication strategy used to confirm patient understanding in a non-shaming way. Although Teach Back is widely recommended as a best practice strategy for improving patient outcomes and organizational health literacy, there is lack of consensus in the literature on the definition of Teach Back and the best methods for training health care workers (HCWs). Our experience suggests that if you teach specific, observable skills, these can be identified in practice and potentially measured in research. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITY:We created a training program, the 5Ts for Teach Back, based on a standardized operational definition of Teach Back and five specific, observable components. Participants use a Teach-Back Observation Tool to identify the 5Ts in practice and during peer evaluation. The program incorporates lecture, observation, practice, and videos with good and bad examples of Teach Back. IMPLEMENTATION:The training was offered to HCWs in a large academic health care system. Flexible training options ranged from a single 4-hour training to a more comprehensive program that included clinic-specific scenarios, peer coaching, and refresher activities over a 6-month period. RESULTS:The 5Ts for Teach Back operationalizes the definition of Teach Back and provides a model for training HCWs in the use of Teach Back. The 5Ts for Teach Back can be used to train any HCW. A single training session does not guarantee proficiency in practice. Through coaching and refresher activities, competence in Teach Back increases. LESSONS LEARNED:Teaching entire clinical units may increase effectiveness, because Teach Back becomes embedded in the unit culture. The Observation Tool can be used for training, coaching, and evaluation. The standardized method and Observation Tool are potentially useful when evaluating Teach Back during outcomes and patient satisfaction research. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2020;4(2):94-103.] PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Health care workers may be clearer when giving information to patients if they use Teach Back. Studies do not show what methods are best for training health care workers how to do Teach Back. The 5Ts method breaks Teach Back into five skills that help health care workers do it well. The 5Ts can also confirm use and may be helpful for research.

Project description:BackgroundFor the optimal use of clinical guidelines in daily practice, mere distribution of guidelines and materials is not enough, and active implementation is needed. This review investigated the effectiveness of multifaceted implementation strategies compared to minimal, single, or no implementation strategy for the implementation of non-specific low back and/or neck pain guidelines in health care.MethodsThe following electronic databases were searched from inception to June 1, 2015: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL. The search strategy was restricted to low back pain, neck pain, and implementation research. Studies were included if their design was a randomized controlled trial, reporting on patients (age ≥18 years) with non-specific low back pain or neck pain (with or without radiating pain). Trials were eligible if they reported patient outcomes, measures of healthcare professional behaviour, and/or outcomes on healthcare level. The primary outcome was professional behaviour. Guidelines that were evaluated in the studies had to be implemented in a healthcare setting. No language restrictions were applied, and studies had to be published full-text in peer-reviewed journals, thus excluding abstract only publications, conference abstracts, and dissertation articles. Two researchers independently screened titles and abstract, extracted data from included studies, and performed risk of bias assessments.ResultsAfter removal of duplicates, the search resulted in 4750 abstracts to be screened. Of 43 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, 12 were included in this review, reporting on 9 individual studies, and separate cost-effectiveness analyses of 3 included studies. Implementation strategies varied between studies. Meta-analyses did not reveal any differences in effect between multifaceted strategies and controls.ConclusionThis review showed that multifaceted strategies for the implementation of neck and/or back pain guidelines in health care do not significantly improve professional behaviour outcomes. No effects on patient outcomes or cost of care could be found. More research is necessary to determine whether multifaceted implementation strategies are conducted as planned and whether these strategies are effective in changing professional behaviour and thereby clinical practice.

Project description:BackgroundTelehealth professionals require advanced communication skills, in part to compensate for lack of visual cues. Teach-Back is a best practice communication technique that has been recommended but not previously evaluated for consumer telehealth. We aimed to implement Teach-Back at a national maternal and child health telephone helpline. We describe the intervention and report telenurse experiences learning to use Teach-Back.MethodsWe identified barriers (time, knowledge, skills, beliefs) and enablers (self-reflection) to using Teach-Back, and developed a novel training program to address these, guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework. We engaged maternal and child health telenurses to participate in a "communication skills" study. The intervention had two key components: guided self-reflection and a Teach-Back skills workshop. For the duration of the 7-week study nurses completed brief online surveys following each call, reflecting on both the effectiveness of their communication and perceived caller understanding. At the end of each shift they reflected on what worked well. Teach-Back knowledge, skills, and beliefs were addressed in a 2-h workshop using videos, discussion, and role play. We explored nurses' experiences of the intervention in focus groups and interviews; and analysed transcripts and comments from the self-reflection surveys using the Framework method. This study forms part of a larger evaluation conducted in 2016.ResultsIn total 16 nurses participated: 15 were trained in Teach-Back, and 13 participated in focus groups or interviews. All engaged with both self-reflection and Teach-Back, although to differing extents. Those who reported acquiring Teach-Back skills easily limited themselves to one or two Teach-Back phrases. Nurses reported that actively self-reflecting (including on what they did well) was useful both for developing Teach-Back skills and analysing effectiveness of the techniques. Most wanted more opportunity to learn how their colleagues manage Teach-Back in different situations, and more visual reminders to use Teach-Back.ConclusionsOur theory-informed intervention successfully enabled nurses to use Teach-Back. Guided self-reflection is a low-resource method aligned with nurse professional identity that can facilitate Teach-Back skills learning, and could also be applied to other advanced communication skills for telehealth. Listening to multiple workplace-specific examples of Teach-Back is recommended for future training.Trial registrationACTRN12616000623493 Registered 15 May 2016. Retrospectively registered.

Dataset Information

Teach-back: A systematic review of implementation and impacts.

Publications

Teach-back: A systematic review of implementation and impacts.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets