A multisite study of multidisciplinary ICU team member beliefs toward early mobility.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Early mobility is underutilized in critical care.Objective
Describe multidisciplinary intensive care unit (ICU) providers beliefs about the conduct of early mobility during critical illness.Methods
A 7-item elicitation survey was administered to a multidisciplinary sample of ICU team members. We conducted independent thematic analysis of n = 95 surveys.Results
Analysis resulted in three themes: immediate risk vs. long-term reward conflict, nurse is the initiator and coordinator of early mobilization, and situational factors. Staffing was the primary facilitator and barrier to early mobility. Enablers included protection from complications of hospitalization, reduced hospital length of stay, and improved patient morale. Barriers strongly revolved around team member risk aversion (e.g., falls, hemodynamic instability, line dislodgment). Nurses were equally identified as positive and negative referents for early mobility.Conclusions
Strong positive and negative attitudinal beliefs were elicited. Early mobility is a protective behavior that requires sufficient numbers of trained staff and equipment.
SUBMITTER: Boehm LM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7738426 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeEarly mobilization in the intensive care unit (ICU) can improve patient outcomes but has perceived barriers to implementation. As part of an ongoing structured quality improvement project to increase mobilization of medical ICU patients by nurses and clinical technicians, we adapted the existing, validated Patient Mobilization Attitudes & Beliefs Survey (PMABS) for the ICU setting and evaluated its performance characteristics and results.Materials and methodsThe 26-item PMABS adapted for the ICU (PMABS-ICU) was administered as an online survey to 163 nurses, clinical technicians, respiratory therapists, attending and fellow physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants in one medical ICU. We evaluated the overall and subscale (knowledge, attitude, and behavior) scores and compared these scores by respondent characteristics (clinical role and years of work experience).ResultsThe survey response rate was 96% (155/163). The survey demonstrated acceptable discriminant validity and acceptable internal consistency for the overall scale (Cronbach α: 0.82, 95% confidence interval: 0.76-0.85), with weaker internal consistency for all subscales (Cronbach α: 0.62-0.69). Across all respondent groups, the overall barrier score (range: 1-100) was relatively low, with attending physicians perceiving the lowest barriers (median [interquartile range]: 30 [28-34]) and nurses perceiving the highest (37 [31-40]). Within the first 10 years of work experience, greater experience was associated with a lower overall barrier score (-0.8 for each additional year; P = 0.02).ConclusionsIn our medical ICU, across 6 different clinical roles, there were relatively low perceived barriers to patient mobility, with greater work experience over the first 10 years being associated with lower perceived barriers. As part of a structured quality improvement project, the PMABS-ICU may be valuable in assisting to identify specific perceived barriers for consideration in designing mobility interventions for the ICU setting.
| S-EPMC6541532 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Trauma care delivery is a complex team-based task that requires deliberate practice. The COVID-19 pandemic has not diminished the importance of excellent trauma team dynamics. However, the pandemic hampers our ability to gather safely and train together. A mitigating solution is the provision of high-fidelity simulation training in a virtual setting. The Simulated Trauma and Resuscitation Team Training (S.T.A.R.T.T.) course has provided multidisciplinary trauma team members with skills in crisis resource management (CRM) for nearly 10 years. It has promoted collaborative learning from coast to coast, as the course typically runs at our national surgical and trauma meetings. In response to COVID-19 challenges, the course content has been modified to virtually connect 2 centres in different provinces simultaneously. High participant satisfaction suggests that the new virtual E-S.T.A.R.T.T course is able to continue to help providers develop important CRM skills in a multidisciplinary setting while remaining compliant with COVID-19 safety precautions.
| S-EPMC8592779 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients often need admission at an Intensive Care Unit (ICU), immediately after complex abdominal wall reconstruction (CAWR). Lack of ICU resources requires adequate patient selection for a planned postoperative ICU admission. Risk stratification tools like Fischer score and Hernia Patient Wound (HPW) classification may improve patient selection. This study evaluates the decision-making process in a multidisciplinary team (MDT) on justified ICU admissions for patients after CAWR.MethodsA pre-Covid-19 pandemic cohort of patients, discussed in a MDT and subsequently underwent CAWR between 2016 and 2019, was analyzed. A justified ICU admission was defined by any intervention within the first 24 h postoperatively, considered not suitable for a nursing ward. The Fischer score predicts postoperative respiratory failure by eight parameters and a high score (> 2) warrants ICU admission. The HPW classification ranks complexity of hernia (size), patient (comorbidities) and wound (infected surgical field) in four stages, with increasing risk for postoperative complications. Stages II-IV point to ICU admission. Accuracy of the MDT decision and (modifications of) risk-stratification tools on justified ICU admissions were analyzed by backward stepwise multivariate logistic regression analysis.ResultsPre-operatively, the MDT decided a planned ICU admission in 38% of all 232 CAWR patients. Intra-operative events changed the MDT decision in 15% of all CAWR patients. MDT overestimated ICU need in 45% of ICU planned patients and underestimated in 10% of nursing ward planned patients. Ultimately, 42% went to the ICU and 27% of all 232 CAWR patients were justified ICU patients. MDT accuracy was higher than the Fischer score, HPW classification or any modification of these risk stratification tools.ConclusionA MDT's decision for a planned ICU admission after complex abdominal wall reconstruction was more accurate than any of the other risk-stratifying tools. Fifteen percent of the patients experienced unexpected operative events that changed the MDT decision. This study demonstrated the added value of a MDT in the care pathway of patients with complex abdominal wall hernias.
| S-EPMC9994771 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Whole-exome/whole-genome sequencing (WES/WGS) has the potential to enhance genetic diagnosis of rare disease, and is increasingly becoming part of routine clinical care in mainstream medicine. Effective translation will require ongoing efforts in a number of areas including: selection of appropriate patients, provision of effective consent, pre- and post-test genetic counselling, improving variant interpretation algorithms and practices, and management of secondary findings including those found incidentally and those actively sought. Allied to this is the need for an effective education programme for all members of clinical teams involved in care of patients with rare disease, as well as to maintain public confidence in the use of these technologies. We established a Genomic Medicine Multidisciplinary Team (GM-MDT) in 2014 to build on the experiences of earlier successful research-based WES/WGS studies, to address these needs and to review results including pertinent and secondary findings. Here we report on a qualitative study of decision-making in the GM-MDT combined with analysis of semi-structured interviews with GM-MDT members. Study findings show that members appreciate the clinical and scientific diversity of the GM-MDT and value it for education and oversight. To date, discussions have focussed on case selection including the extent and interpretation of clinical and family history information required to establish likely monogenic aetiology and inheritance model. Achieving a balance between effective use of WES/WGS - prioritising cases in a diverse and highly complex patient population where WES/WGS will be tractable - and meeting the recruitment targets of a large project is considered challenging.
| S-EPMC5427178 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Addressing the quality gap in ICU-based palliative care is limited by uncertainty about acceptable models of collaborative specialist and generalist care. Therefore, we characterized the attitudes of physicians and nurses about palliative care delivery in an ICU environment.Mixed-methods study.Medical and surgical ICUs at three large academic hospitals.Three hundred three nurses, intensivists, and advanced practice providers.Clinicians completed written surveys that assessed attitudes about specialist palliative care presence and integration into the ICU setting, as well as acceptability of 23 published palliative care prompts (triggers) for specialist consultation. Most (n = 225; 75%) reported that palliative care consultation was underutilized. Prompting consideration of eligibility for specialist consultation by electronic health record searches for triggers was most preferred (n = 123; 41%); only 17 of them (6%) felt current processes were adequate. The most acceptable specialist triggers were metastatic malignancy, unrealistic goals of care, end of life decision making, and persistent organ failure. Advanced age, length of stay, and duration of life support were the least acceptable. Screening led by either specialists or ICU teams was equally preferred. Central themes derived from qualitative analysis of 65 written responses to open-ended items included concerns about the roles of physicians and nurses, implementation, and impact on ICU team-family relationships.Integration of palliative care specialists in the ICU is broadly acceptable and desired. However, the most commonly used current triggers for prompting specialist consultation were among the least well accepted, while more favorable triggers are difficult to abstract from electronic health record systems. There is also disagreement about the role of ICU nurses in palliative care delivery. These findings provide important guidance to the development of collaborative care models for the ICU setting.
| S-EPMC5344777 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Multidisciplinary team meetings are a current international practice in cancer care, but to date, few data exist on the specificity of its practice in hematology.In this manuscript, we present the result of the first national study, realized with quantitative and qualitative methods in France, which brings new insights in order to improve the collegial decision-making process.To improve the effectiveness of MDTMs, the needs to focus on complex cases, to enhance patient centeredness and teamwork are relevant aspects, and a specific focus on hematological particularities is warranted to truly improve process.Background Understanding the Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) process in different medical specialties facilitates the identification of core factors supporting effective MDTM work. Our mixed-methods study explores the participants' perceptions of hematology MDTMs.Design Online questionnaires collected data concerning the decision-making process, benefits and inconveniences of MDTMs for both patients and professionals. Semi-directive phone interviews were conducted and analyzed, thereby supplying qualitative data.Results A total of 205 professionals responded to the questionnaire and 22 participated in the qualitative interviews. The data indicate the unique characteristics of hematology, including a specific definition of collegiality, the frequent solicitation of expert advice and the anticipation of treatment even prior to the occurrence of MDTMs. Additional information concerning patients' wishes and psychosocial conditions are also needed. Participants emphasize the subjective aspects and the impact of the climate of MDTMs on medical decisions.Conclusion Although MDTMs are recognized to be a valuable tool, organizational and relational issues may interfere with their efficiency.To improve the effectiveness of MDTMs, the needs to focus on complex cases, to enhance patient centeredness and teamwork are relevant aspects. A specific focus on hematological particularities might be warranted to truly improve the collegial decision-making process in the context of hematology.
| S-EPMC10560417 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The optimal care for patients with pituitary tumours is best provided in a multidisciplinary and collaborative environment, which requires the contribution of multiple medical specialties working together. The benefits and advantages of the pituitary multidisciplinary team (MDT) are broad, and all relevant international consensus and guidelines in the field recommend that patients with pituitary tumours should always be managed in a MDT. Endocrinologists and neurosurgeons are normally the leading specialties within the pituitary MDT, supported by many other specialties with significant contributions to the diagnosis and management of pituitary tumours, including neuropathology, neuroradiology, neuro-ophthalmology, and otorhinolaryngology, among others. Here, we review the literature concerning the concepts of Pituitary MDT/Pituitary Tumour Centre of Excellence (PTCOE) in terms of their mission, goals, benefits, structure, proposed models of function, and barriers, and we also provide the views of different specialists involved in our Pituitary MDT.
| S-EPMC10930925 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesMultidisciplinary approach is well established in various disciplines, with evidence highlighting improved patient outcomes. The objective of this survey was to determine the real-world practice of heart teams across Europe.MethodsThe survey was drafted after a consensus opinion from the authors. The survey was sent to cardiac surgeons and cardiologists identified through electronic search. The survey link and the information sheet were sent through email followed by survey completion reminders. The survey responses were cumulated and analysed.ResultsAmong 2188 invited clinicians, 220 clinicians from 26 countries took part in the survey (response rate 10%). The completion rate for the survey questions was 85%. A total of 140 (64%) were cardiac surgeons and 80 (36%) were cardiologists. The heart team meeting frequency was weekly according to 104 (55%) respondents. This was conducted face to face according to 139 (73%) of the responses. Eighty-seven (56%) of the respondents reported 10-20% of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were discussed at the heart team meeting. Seventy-nine (47%) respondents had ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention institutional guidelines. Fifty-four (32%) respondents reported an audit process for the heart team decisions.ConclusionsThis survey suggests that there is marked variability in the infra-structure and execution of heart teams in different institutions. The results of the survey suggest a need to formulate guidelines on the composition and execution of heart teams which may result in an increase in transparency of decision-making within different institutions in reporting and comparing outcomes.
| S-EPMC11015317 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTumor boards (TB) play an important role to formulate a management plan for the treatment of patients with a malignancy. Recent evidence suggests that optimally functioning teams (teamwork, communication and decision making) are major prerequisites to conduct efficient TB meetings. The aims of this study were i) to use a readily published tool as a template for the development of a teamwork perspective extended assessment tool and ii) to evaluate the tool in a feasibility study by clinical and non-clinical observers.MethodsA systematic literature search in four databases revealed the "Metric for the Observation of Decision-making (MODe)" to be consistently used. MODe served as a template for the clinical evaluation, additional, notably teamwork items were integrated, and the resulting tool was tested in a feasibility study in TBs by clinical and non-clinical observers. The percentage of agreement between observers was assessed in a two-step approach: first, agreement of raters on discussion of items by TB members, and second, agreement of raters based on ordinal scale.ResultsIn total, 244 patients were discussed in 27 TB sessions, thereof 136 (56%) fast track cases and 108 (44%) complex cases. In 228 (93%) of all cases an agreement for recommendation of a treatment plan was reached. Observers showed in general high agreement on discussion of the items. For the majority of items, the percentage of agreement between the different pairs of rater was similar and mostly high.ConclusionA newly developed TB team performance tool using MODe as a template was piloted in a German-speaking country and enabled the assessment of specialized multidisciplinary teams with a special focus on teamwork patterns. The developed assessment tool requires evaluation in a larger collective for validation, and additional assessment whether it can be applied equally by non-clinicians and clinicians.
| S-EPMC6377131 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTs), also known as tumour boards or multidisciplinary case conferences, are an integral component of contemporary cancer care. There are logistical problems with setting up and maintaining participation in these meetings. An ill-defined concept, the virtual MDT (vMDT), has arisen in response to these difficulties. We have, in order to provide clarity and to generate discussion, attempted to define the concept of the vMDT, outline its advantages and disadvantages, and consider some of the practical aspects involved in setting up a virtual MDT. METHODS: This is an unstructured review of published evidence and personal experience relating to virtual teams in general, and to MDTs in particular. RESULTS: We have devised a simple taxonomy for MDTs, discussed some of the practicalities involved in setting up a vMDT, and described some of the potential advantages and disadvantages associated with vMDTs. CONCLUSION: The vMDT may be useful for discussions concerning rare or unusual tumours, or for helping guide the assessment and management of patients with uncommon complications related to treatment. However, the vMDT is a niche concept and is currently unlikely to replace the more traditional face-to-face MDT in the management of common tumours at specific sites.
| S-EPMC3694234 | biostudies-other