Critical care nursing policy, practice, and research priorities: An international cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: To examine the status of critical care nursing internationally, assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and identify research priorities by surveying professional critical care nursing organizations (CCNOs) worldwide. DESIGN: A descriptive survey methodology was used. This study is the sixth worldwide quadrennial review to assess international critical care nursing needs and provide evidence to inform critical care nursing policy, practice and research priorities globally. METHODS: The sixth World Federation of Critical Care Nurses survey of CCNOs was emailed to potential participants from countries with CCNOs or known critical care nurse leaders. Data were collected online using Survey Monkey™. Responses were entered into SPSS version 28 software (IBM Corp.) and analyzed by geographical region and national wealth group. FINDINGS: Ninety-nine national representative respondents participated in the survey (70.7% response rate). The most important issues identified were working conditions, teamwork, staffing levels, formal practice guidelines, wages, and access to quality education programs. The top five CCNO services that were of most importance were providing national conferences, local conferences, workshops and education forums, practice standards and guidelines, and professional representation. Important pandemic-related services and activities provided by CCNOs included addressing emotional and mental well-being of nurses, providing guidance related to nurse staffing/workforce needs, assisting to coordinate efforts to obtain personal protective equipment supplies, serving as a country liaison with the World Health Organization's COVID-19 response activities, and assisting in the development and implementation of policies regarding standards of care. The most important contributions expected from the World Federation of Critical Care Nurses were standards for professional practice, standards for clinical practice, website resources, professional representation, and providing online education and training materials. The top five research priority areas were: stress levels (inclusive of burnout, emotional exhaustion and compassion fatigue); critical care nursing shortage, skill mix and workforce planning; recruitment, retention, turnover, working conditions; critical care nursing education and patient outcomes; and adverse events, staffing levels, patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight priority areas for critical care nursing internationally. The COVID-19 pandemic impacted critical care nurses as direct care providers. As a result, addressing the ongoing needs of critical care nurses remains a priority area of focus. The results also highlight important policy and research priorities for critical care nursing globally. Results of this survey should be incorporated into strategic action plans at the national and international levels. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Issues of importance to critical care nurses including research and policy priorities during and following COVID-19 are now clarified through this survey. The impact and importance that COVID-19 has had on critical care nurses and their preferences and priorities are provided. Clear guidance to leaders and policy makers on where critical care nurses would like to see greater focus and attention to help strengthen the contribution of critical care nursing practice to the global healthcare agenda.

Changes in Telehealth Experienced by Advanced Practice RNs During COVID-19: US Survey Results.

The sudden, expanded need for telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic added to the challenges advanced practice RNs face in the United States. The purposes of this article are to summarize advanced practice RNs' responses about the use of telehealth before and during the pandemic and to analyze free-text comments about how the use of telehealth changed during the pandemic. A 20-item survey was distributed using convenience sampling to advanced practice RNs from June 1 to September 23, 2020. Analyses of descriptive and open text responses related to telehealth were conducted. Most of the respondents did not use telehealth prior to the pandemic (n = 5441 [73%]), but during the pandemic, half used telehealth at least daily (n = 3682 [49%]). The most common barriers related to telehealth were about the difficulty some populations had in accessing the necessary technology. The most common favorable comments cited by respondents were related to some patients' improved access to care. Telehealth use is unlikely to return to prepandemic levels. As a result, considerations of telehealth-related recommendations provided for advanced practice RN education, policy, and practice are encouraged for the purpose of increasing healthcare access.

Caregivers' experience with Tele-Savvy Caregiver Program post-hospitalization.

Despite the frequent hospitalizations and readmissions of persons living with dementia (PLWD), no telehealth transitional care interventions focus on PLWDs' unpaid caregivers. Tele-Savvy Caregiver Program is a 43-day evidence-based online psychoeducational intervention for PLWDs' caregivers. The aim of this formative evaluation was to explore caregivers' acceptability of and experience with their participation in Tele-Savvy after their PLWDs' hospital discharge. Additionally, we gathered caregivers' feedback on the recommended features of a transitional care intervention, suitable for caregivers' schedule and needs post-discharge. Fifteen caregivers completed the interviews. Data were analyzed via conventional content analysis. Four categories were identified: (1) Tele-Savvy improved participants' understanding of dementia and caregiving; (2) hospitalization started a "new level of normal"; (3) PLWDs' health concerns; and (4) transitional care intervention development. Participation in Tele-Savvy was acceptable for most caregivers. Participants' feedback provides content and structural guidance for the development of a new transitional care intervention for PLWDs' caregivers.

Assessing postgraduate outcomes of research-intensive nursing science PhD programs: Methods and metrics.

BACKGROUND: Across disciplines and within higher educational systems, assessing postgraduate outcomes is essential for evaluating doctoral programs, including research-intensive nursing science doctoral programs. However, there are limited reports regarding methods and metrics related to postgraduate longitudinal evaluation of research-focused nursing doctoral programs. PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to summarize studies in the area of postgraduate outcome assessment and provide recommendations regarding outcome methods and metrics for evaluating the effectiveness of research-focused nursing doctoral programs. METHODS: PubMed/Medline, CINHAL Complete, and Google Scholar databases were searched using key words including PhD program, doctoral program, longitudinal evaluation, evaluation, program evaluation, PhD alumni survey, education outcomes and PhD program outcomes. We excluded non-English and full-text articles that were not available for review. DISCUSSION: Based on a review of the literature, there are few reports on methods and questionnaires for postgraduate outcome assessment. There is a critical need to develop standardized core metrics/questions, longitudinal assessments, and a shared data repository. The latter will allow for comparisons across nursing doctoral programs. CONCLUSION: Robust standardized longitudinal assessment of nursing doctoral programs is a necessary step for comparison across programs and re-envisioning the nursing doctoral education of the future.

Breaking Down Institutional Barriers to Advanced Practice Registered Nurse Practice.

Advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) significantly contribute to health promotion, disease prevention, and disease management. Yet, barriers to APRN practice exist, including regulatory, state, and institutional barriers, that hinder their ability to practice to the full extent of their education, licensure, and certification. Nurse leaders can play an important role in helping reduce unnecessary institutional barriers to APRN practice.

Results of a National Survey: Ongoing Barriers to APRN Practice in the United States.

Limited information is available on the barriers to practice for advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) among states with full, restricted, and reduced practice. The purpose of this study is to identify practice barriers in relationship to United States (U.S.) state practice authority, APRN type, area of practice (rural, suburban, urban), and nature of practice (outpatient, inpatient, and both). An electronic survey of a convenience sample of APRNs was conducted to assess barriers to practice. Identified barriers were examined based on state practice environment, APRN role, practice setting, and location. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis for qualitative data and descriptive analysis for quantitative data. Over 7,000 APRNs representing all 50 states participated. Themes that were identified and reported by respondents, included licensure and administrative barriers, therapy restrictions, physician signature requirements, a lack of collegiality, prescribing barriers, uneven reimbursement, physician only procedures, and telehealth issues. Barriers were identified in all states, regardless of the type of practice authority. All four APRN role types identified practice barriers, some of which were more frequent for some roles than others. Restrictions for home health approval and the requirement for a physician signature for durable medical supply orders were identified by over 40% of respondents practicing in rural areas. Barriers to APRN practice continue to restrict aspects of patient care and patient access to care, even in states with full practice authority. Continued efforts to reduce barriers to APRN practice are needed to ensure patient access to care, especially in rural areas.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines on the Management of Adults With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the ICU: First Update.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic continues to affect millions worldwide. Given the rapidly growing evidence base, we implemented a living guideline model to provide guidance on the management of patients with severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 in the ICU. METHODS: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Coronavirus Disease 2019 panel has expanded to include 43 experts from 14 countries; all panel members completed an electronic conflict-of-interest disclosure form. In this update, the panel addressed nine questions relevant to managing severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 in the ICU. We used the World Health Organization's definition of severe and critical coronavirus disease 2019. The systematic reviews team searched the literature for relevant evidence, aiming to identify systematic reviews and clinical trials. When appropriate, we performed a random-effects meta-analysis to summarize treatment effects. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach, then used the evidence-to-decision framework to generate recommendations based on the balance between benefit and harm, resource and cost implications, equity, and feasibility. RESULTS: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Coronavirus Diease 2019 panel issued nine statements (three new and six updated) related to ICU patients with severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019. For severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019, the panel strongly recommends using systemic corticosteroids and venous thromboprophylaxis but strongly recommends against using hydroxychloroquine. In addition, the panel suggests using dexamethasone (compared with other corticosteroids) and suggests against using convalescent plasma and therapeutic anticoagulation outside clinical trials. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Coronavirus Diease 2019 panel suggests using remdesivir in nonventilated patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 and suggests against starting remdesivir in patients with critical coronavirus disease 2019 outside clinical trials. Because of insufficient evidence, the panel did not issue a recommendation on the use of awake prone positioning. CONCLUSION: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Coronavirus Diease 2019 panel issued several recommendations to guide healthcare professionals caring for adults with critical or severe coronavirus disease 2019 in the ICU. Based on a living guideline model the recommendations will be updated as new evidence becomes available.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on APRN practice: Results from a national survey.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) practice is not well known. PURPOSE: This study aimed to describe state practice barriers and explore the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on APRN practice. METHODS: A descriptive study design used a 20-item web-based survey open from June 1 through September 23, 2020. FINDINGS: A total of 7,467 APRNs responded from all 50 states, including nurse practitioners (n = 6,478, 86.8%), certified registered nurse anesthetists (n = 592, 7.9%), certified nurse-midwives (n = 278, 3.7%), and clinical nurse specialists (n = 242, 3.2%). A number of barriers to practice prior to the pandemic were identified. Most respondents (n = 6334, 84.8%) identified that practice barriers limited the ability of APRNs to provide care during the pandemic. DISCUSSION: Barriers to APRN practice continue to restrict aspects of patient care and patient access to care, even in states with Full Practice Authority (FPA), during the COVID-19 pandemic and with state executive orders waiving practice restrictions. The study findings can be used to advocate for policy changes to support APRN practice authority.

The interprofessional Veterans Affairs Quality Scholars program pre- and postdoctoral nurse fellow outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Quality Scholars (VAQS) program, an interprofessional fellowship that includes pre- and postdoctoral nurses, aims to inspire practice change leaders. Fellows participate in a national curriculum, lead improvement/research teams, and establish professional development plans with expert mentor guidance. PURPOSE: To describe the distinctive elements of the VAQS program, nurse fellow outcomes, and accomplishments of nurse alumni as leaders, researchers, and educators. METHODS: Data were reviewed and aggregated from past and current fellow surveys. FINDINGS: Nurse fellows completed research and improvement projects that benefitted both the VA and the local health systems. Scholarly outcomes include publications, conference presentations, grant submissions, teaching/leading quality improvement, and research initiatives. Graduates transition to positions as nurse scientists, academic faculty, and operational leaders. DISCUSSION: Fellows contribute to the strategic priorities of local and national VA and external health care organizations providing a pipeline of health system expert leaders, educators, and researchers. CONCLUSION: Doctoral nursing fellowship experiences build human capital for enhancing the science of improvement and implementation, interprofessional collaboration, and leadership.

Mindfulness Workshops Effects on Nurses' Burnout, Stress, and Mindfulness Skills.

Burnout decreases work performance and quality of care and can result in medical errors, lower patient satisfaction, and higher rates of turnover. A study of 68 000 registered nurses showed that 35% of hospital nurses were experiencing symptoms of burnout. A systematic review identified that mindfulness-based interventions for health care professionals reduced stress and burnout and increased self-compassion and general health. However, the authors determined that more high-quality research is needed. This study examined the impact of a 4-hour workshop on burnout syndrome, perceived stress, and mindfulness skills. The objective of this study was to determine whether a 4-hour mindfulness workshop was effective in reducing burnout and perceived levels of stress and increasing mindfulness. Nurses at a Midwest academic medical center were recruited through e-mail to attend a 4-hour mindfulness workshop. Participants completed the Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Service Survey, Perceived Stress Scale, and Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness Scale-Revised prior to the start of the workshop and 1 and 6 months after the workshop. The study design allowed for comparisons preintervention and postintervention. Of the 52 nurses who completed the baseline questionnaires, 94% were female with an average age of 38 years. Thirty-one percent completed the questionnaires at 1 month and 20 nurses at 6 months. At 1 month, nurses reported statistically significant decreased perceptions of stress (-2.31, P = .01) and emotional exhaustion (-4.78, P = .03). Mindfulness skills, personal accomplishment, and depersonalization improved but were not statistically significant. At 6 months, statistically significant findings included increased perceptions of mindfulness (2.50, P = .04), personal accomplishment (4.43, P = .04), and decreased emotional exhaustion (-6.21, P = .05). Perceptions of stress and depersonalization improved but were not statistically significant. In this study, nurses reported decreases in burnout and perceived stress and increases in mindfulness after attending a 4-hour mindfulness workshop. Further research is needed to determine the long-term impact of mindfulness-based training on nurses' burnout, stress, and mindfulness skills. The results of this study add to the body of literature that supports the benefits of mindfulness-based interventions.

Showcasing Nursing Leadership and Contributions to a University's COVID-19 Student Contact Tracing Process.

The COVID-19 pandemic was an unprecedented event that impacted every segment of healthcare, including universities preparing healthcare professionals. Instituting processes to coordinate student return to campus and ongoing COVID-19 testing and contract tracing challenged university campuses, but also brought opportunities for collaboration. This article reports on the experiences of one nonprofit private higher education university in management of the COVID-19 testing and contact tracing that were led by school of nursing faculty and nursing leadership.

The Critical Nature of Addressing Burnout Prevention: Results From the Critical Care Societies Collaborative's National Summit and Survey on Prevention and Management of Burnout in the ICU.

OBJECTIVES: To summarize the results of expert discussions and recommendations from a National Summit and survey on the promoting wellness and preventing and managing burnout in the ICU. DATA SOURCES: Literature review; Critical Care Societies Collaborative (CCSC) Statement on Burnout Syndrome in Critical Care Healthcare Professionals: A Call for Action; CCSC's National Summit on Prevention and Management of Burnout in the ICU; and a descriptive survey on strategies for addressing burnout using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) (project-redcap.org). DATA SYNTHESIS: Building on the CCSC call for action to address burnout among critical care professionals, the CCSC sponsored the National Summit on Prevention and Management of Burnout in the ICU with 55 invited experts in various fields including psychology, sociology, integrative medicine, psychiatry, suicide prevention, bereavement support, ethics, palliative care, meditation, mindfulness-based stress reduction, among others. Attendees joined breakout groups, to identify factors influencing burnout in ICU professionals and the value of organizational and individual interventions. As a follow-up to the Summit, a descriptive survey assessing strategies for addressing burnout was sent via email or newsletter blast with responses received from 680 CCSC members, including physicians, nurses, pharmacists, therapists, and others. CONCLUSIONS: The Summit attendees identified the importance of raising awareness among critical care clinicians and key stakeholders, advocating for workplace changes to promote healthy work environments, and promoting research to further explore practical strategies to address, mitigate, and prevent burnout. Critical care clinicians reported that a number of initiatives are being implemented both at their hospitals and at the unit level to build resilience and address burnout prevention. However, other respondents reported that no measures were being used within their organizations, and that colleagues were experiencing burnout. Dissemination and application of resiliency building measures and strategies to address burnout in critical care clinicians are needed.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic Measures: Reports From a National Survey of 9,120 ICU Clinicians.

IMPORTANCE: Recent reports identify that among hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients, 30% require ICU care. Understanding ICU resource needs remains an essential component of meeting current and projected needs of critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients. OBJECTIVES: This study queried U.S. ICU clinician perspectives on challenging aspects of care in managing coronavirus disease 2019 patients, current and anticipated resource demands, and personal stress. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using a descriptive survey methodology, an anonymous web-based survey was administered from April 7, 2020, to April 22, 2020 (email and newsletter) to query members of U.S. national critical care organizations. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Through a 16-item descriptive questionnaire, ICU clinician perceptions were assessed regarding current and emerging critical ICU needs in managing the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infected patients, resource levels, concerns about being exposed to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, and perceived level of personal stress. A total of 9,120 ICU clinicians responded to the survey, representing all 50 U.S. states, with 4,106 (56.9%) working in states with 20,000 or more coronavirus disease 2019 cases. The 7,317 respondents who indicated their profession included ICU nurses (n = 6,731, 91.3%), advanced practice providers (nurse practitioners and physician assistants; n = 334, 4.5%), physicians (n = 212, 2.9%), respiratory therapists (n = 31, 0.4%), and pharmacists (n = 30, 0.4%). A majority (n = 6,510, 88%) reported having cared for a patient with presumed or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019. The most critical ICU needs identified were personal protective equipment, specifically N95 respirator availability, and ICU staffing. Minimizing healthcare worker virus exposure during care was believed to be the most challenging aspect of coronavirus disease 2019 patient care (n = 2,323, 30.9%). Nurses report a high level of concern about exposing family members to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (median score of 10 on 0-10 scale). Similarly, the level of concern reached the maximum score of 10 in ICU clinicians who had provided care to coronavirus disease 2019 patients. CONCLUSIONS: This national ICU clinician survey identifies continued concerns regarding personal protective equipment supplies with the chief issue being N95 respirator availability. As the pandemic continues, ICU clinicians anticipate a number of limited resources that may impact ICU care including personnel, capacity, and surge potential, as well as staff and subsequent family members exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. These persistent concerns greatly magnify personal stress, offering a therapeutic target for professional organization and facility intervention efforts.

The Fifth International Survey of Critical Care Nursing Organizations: Implications for Policy.

PURPOSE: To examine the activities, concerns, and expectations of critical care nurses and professional critical care nursing organizations worldwide. DESIGN: A descriptive survey methodology was used. This study is the fifth worldwide quadrennial review of its type to monitor variations in critical care nursing needs and provide robust evidence to inform policy related to critical care nursing practice. METHODS: The fifth World Federation of Critical Care Nurses international survey of critical care nursing organizations was emailed to potential participants from countries with critical care nursing organizations or known critical care nurse leaders. Data were collected online. Responses were entered into SPSS version 23 software (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) and analyzed by geographical region and national wealth group. FINDINGS: Eighty-two national representative respondents participated in the survey, of whom two thirds (n = 56, 68%) had an established critical care nursing organization in their country. The five most important issues identified were working conditions, teamwork, staffing levels, the need for formal practice guidelines and competencies, and wages. The top five critical care nursing organization services that were considered to be of most importance were professional representation, as well as provision of workshops and education forums, national conferences, practice standards and guidelines, and local conferences. The most important contributions expected from the World Federation of Critical Care Nurses were standards for clinical practice and professional practice, international conferences, professional representation, and study and education grants. CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight priority areas for critical care nursing and reinforce the need to address factors that can inform critical care nursing policy and practice. Results of this survey should be incorporated into strategic action plans at the national and international levels. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Nursing leaders, policymakers, and other interested stakeholders should consider these findings when planning critical care workforce requirements. Interested parties should work collaboratively to inform recommendations for further policy and action.

Mother's Own Milk Feeding and Severity of Respiratory Illness in Acutely Ill Children: An Integrative Review.

PROBLEM: Breastfed infants experience less severe infections while actively breastfeeding. However, little is known about whether a history of prior breastfeeding affects severity of illness. Therefore, the purpose of this integrative review was to examine the relationship between previous exposure to mother's own milk (MOM) feeding and severity of respiratory infectious illness in infants and children. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies meeting the following criteria were included: human subjects, term birth, ages 0-35 months at time of study, diagnosis of pneumonia, bronchiolitis or croup, MOM feeding, and statistical analyses reporting separate respiratory infectious illness outcomes when combined with other infections. SAMPLE: Twelve articles met eligibility criteria. RESULTS: Major findings were inconsistent definitions of both dose and exposure period of breastfeeding and the severity of illness. In particular, the severity of illness measure was limited by the use of proxy variables such as emergency room visits or hospitalizations that lacked reliability and validity. However, given this limitation, the data suggested that exclusive breastfeeding for four to six months was associated with reduced severity of illness as measured by frequency of visits to the primary care provider office, emergency department or hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Future research in this area should incorporate reliable and valid measures of MOM dose and exposure period and severity of illness outcomes in the critically ill child. IMPLICATIONS: Among many positive outcomes associated with breastfeeding, an additional talking point for encouragement of exclusive breastfeeding for four to six months may be protective against severe respiratory infectious illness after cessation of breastfeeding.

Describing advanced practice provider roles within critical care teams with Tele-ICUs: Exemplars from seven US health systems.

Telehealth is an acknowledged strategy to meet patient healthcare needs. In critical care settings, Tele-ICU's are expanding to deliver clinical services across a diverse spectrum of critically ill patients. The expansion of telehealth provides increased opportunities for advanced practice providers including advanced practice nurses and physician assistants; however, limited information on roles and models of care for advanced practice providers in telehealth exist. This article reviews current and evolving roles for advanced practice providers in telehealth in acute and critical care settings across 7 healthcare systems in the United States. The health system exemplars described in this article identify the important role of advanced practice providers in providing patient care oversight and in improving outcomes for acute and critically ill patients. As telehealth continues to expand, additional opportunities will lead to novel roles for advanced practice providers in the field of telehealth to assist with patient care management for subacute, acute, and critically ill patients.

The use of national collaborative to promote advanced practice registered nurse-led high-value care initiatives.

BACKGROUND: High-value healthcare focuses on improving healthcare to produce cost effective care, however limited information on the role of advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) exists. PURPOSE: This descriptive report describes APRN-led initiatives implemented as part of a national collaborative promoting the Choosing Wisely® campaign and high-value care measures. METHOD: An APRN national collaborative focuses on developing and implementing high-value care initiatives. Monthly calls, podcasts, and a file sharing platform are used to facilitate the work of the national collaborative. FINDINGS: A total of 16 APRN teams from 14 states are participating and have implemented a number of initiatives to reduce unnecessary testing and treatments, promote appropriate antibiotic use, and promote optimal clinical practices such as mobility for hospitalized elderly patients, among others. DISCUSSION: A national collaborative has proven to be a successful way to engage APRN teams to focus on targeting high-value care and promoting evidence-based practices in clinical care.

Choosing Wisely in Critical Care: Results of a National Survey From the Critical Care Societies Collaborative.

OBJECTIVES: Over-utilization of tests, treatments, and procedures is common for hospitalized patients in ICU settings. American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation's Choosing Wisely campaign tasked professional societies to identify sources of overuse in specialty care practice. The purpose of this study was to assess how critical care clinicians were implementing the Critical Care Societies Collaborative Choosing Wisely recommendations in clinical practice. DESIGN: Descriptive survey methodology with use of Research Electronic Data Capture (https://projectredcap.org/) sent via email newsletter blast or to individual emails of the 150,000 total members of the organizations. SETTING: National survey. SUBJECTS: ICU physicians, nurses, advanced practice providers including nurse practitioners and physician assistants, and pharmacist members of four national critical care societies in the United States. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A six-question survey assessed what Choosing Wisely recommendations had been implemented in ICU settings and if the impact was assessed. A total of 2,520 responses were received from clinicians: nurses (61%; n = 1538), physicians (25.9%; n = 647), advanced practice providers (10.5%; n = 263), and pharmacists (2.1%; n = 52), reflecting a 1.6% response rate of the total membership of 150,000 clinicians. Overall, 1,273 respondents (50.6%) reported they were familiar with the Choosing Wisely campaign. Respondents reported that Choosing Wisely recommendations had been integrated in a number of ways including being implemented in clinical care (n = 817; 72.9%), through development of a specific clinical protocol or institutional guideline (n = 736; 65.7%), through development of electronic medical record orders (n = 626; 55.8%), or with integration of longitudinal tracking using an electronic dashboard (n = 213; 19.0%). Some respondents identified that a specific quality improvement initiative was developed related to the Choosing Wisely recommendations (n = 468; 41.7%), or that a research initiative had been conducted (n = 156; 13.9%). CONCLUSIONS: The results provide information on the application of the Choosing Wisely recommendations to clinical practice from a small sample of critical care clinicians. However, as only half of the respondents report implementation, additional strategies are needed to promote the Choosing Wisely recommendations to make impactful change to improve care in ICU settings.

Nurse Practitioners and Physician Assistants in Acute and Critical Care: A Concise Review of the Literature and Data 2008-2018.

OBJECTIVES: To provide a concise review of the literature and data pertaining to the use of nurse practitioners and physician assistants, collectively called advanced practice providers, in ICU and acute care settings. DATA SOURCES: Detailed search strategy using the databases PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature for the time period from January 2008 to December 2018. STUDY SELECTION: Studies addressing nurse practitioner, physician assistant, or advanced practice provider care in the ICU or acute care setting. DATA EXTRACTION: Relevant studies were reviewed, and the following aspects of each study were identified, abstracted, and analyzed: study population, study design, study aims, methods, results, and relevant implications for critical care practice. DATA SYNTHESIS: Five systematic reviews, four literature reviews, and 44 individual studies were identified, reviewed, and critiqued. Of the research studies, the majority were retrospective with others being observational, quasi-experimental, or quality improvement, along with two randomized control trials. Overall, the studies assessed a variety of effects of advanced practice provider care, including on length of stay, mortality, and quality-related metrics, with a majority demonstrating similar or improved patient care outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Over the past 10 years, the number of studies assessing the impact of advanced practice providers in acute and critical care settings continue to increase. Collectively, these studies identify the value of advanced practice providers in patient care management, continuity of care, improved quality and safety metrics, patient and staff satisfaction, and on new areas of focus including enhanced educational experience of residents and fellows.

Promoting Family Engagement in the ICU: Experience From a National Collaborative of 63 ICUs.

OBJECTIVES: As part of an improvement program targeting ICU, a national collaborative was launched to help hospitals implement patient- and family-centered care engagement initiatives. DESIGN: Ten-month quality improvement collaborative. SETTING: Guided by a national patient and family advisory group, participating teams implemented an individual project including open visitation; integrating families on rounds; establishing a patient and family advisory committee; using patient and family diaries, among others. SUBJECTS: Sixty-three adult and PICU teams from both academic and community hospitals in 34 states participated. INTERVENTIONS: Monthly team calls, quarterly webinars, newsletters, an online eCommunity, and team reporting assignments were used to facilitate project implementation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The Family Satisfaction with Care in the ICU 24 was used to assess family satisfaction. Clinician perceptions were assessed with the Institute for Patient- and Family-Centered Care Self-Assessment Inventory. Thematic analysis was used to explore narrative data captured from team reports of project barriers, facilitators, and the experience of participating in the collaborative. A total of 2,530 family member and 3,999 clinician surveys were completed. Postimplementation, family members reported statistically significant increases in overall family satisfaction, satisfaction with decision-making, and satisfaction with quality of care (Family Satisfaction with Care in the ICU mean score change range 0.83-1.24; p ≤ 0.027). Clinicians reported that opportunities for families to participate as members of the care team increased. Major barriers included lack of buy-in and ability to promote change in the clinical setting, managing the workload of implementation, and funding to support initiatives. CONCLUSIONS: A national collaborative format was useful to assist ICU teams to implement patient- and family-engagement initiatives. Enlisting stakeholder support, engaging unit-based champions, and highlighting benefits of family engagement can help ICU teams to promote family member involvement and engagement.