Can acutely ill patients predict their outcomes? A scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: The full impact of an acute illness on subsequent health is seldom explicitly discussed with patients. Patients' estimates of their likely prognosis have been explored in chronic care settings and can contribute to the improvement of clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. This scoping review aimed to identify studies of acutely ill patients' estimates of their outcomes and potential benefits for their care. METHODS: A search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Google Scholar, using terms related to prognostication and acute care. After removal of duplicates, all articles were assessed for relevance by six investigator pairs; disagreements were resolved by a third investigator. Risk of bias was assessed according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. RESULTS: Our search identified 3265 articles, of which 10 were included. The methods of assessing self-prognostication were very heterogeneous. Patients seem to be able to predict their need for hospital admission in certain settings, but not their length of stay. The severity of their symptoms and the burden of their disease are often overestimated or underestimated by patients. Patients with severe health conditions and their relatives tend to be overoptimistic about the likely outcome. CONCLUSION: The understanding of acutely ill patients of their likely outcomes and benefits of treatment has not been adequately studied and is a major knowledge gap. Limited published literature suggests patients may be able to predict their need for hospital admission. Illness perception may influence help-seeking behaviour, speed of recovery and subsequent quality of life. Knowledge of patients' self-prognosis may enhance communication between patients and their physicians, which improves patient-centred care.

Leaving the hospital on time: hospital bed utilization and reasons for discharge delay in the Netherlands.

Inappropriate bed occupancy due to delayed hospital discharge affects both physical and psychological well-being in patients and can disrupt patient flow. The Dutch healthcare system is facing ongoing pressure, especially during the current coronavirus disease pandemic, intensifying the need for optimal use of hospital beds. The aim of this study was to quantify inappropriate patient stays and describe the underlying reasons for the delays in discharge. The Day of Care Survey (DoCS) is a validated tool used to gain information about appropriate and inappropriate bed occupancy in hospitals. Between February 2019 and January 2021, the DoCS was performed five times in three different hospitals within the region of Amsterdam, the Netherlands. All inpatients were screened, using standardized criteria, for their need for in-hospital care at the time of survey and reasons for discharge delay. A total of 782 inpatients were surveyed. Of these patients, 94 (12%) were planned for definite discharge that day. Of all other patients, 145 (21%, ranging from 14% to 35%) were without the need for acute in-hospital care. In 74% (107/145) of patients, the reason for discharge delay was due to issues outside the hospital; most frequently due to a shortage of available places in care homes (26%, 37/145). The most frequent reason for discharge delay inside the hospital was patients awaiting a decision or review by the treating physician (14%, 20/145). Patients who did not meet the criteria for hospital stay were, in general, older [median 75, interquartile range (IQR) 65-84 years, and 67, IQR 55-75 years, respectively, P < .001] and had spent more days in hospital (7, IQR 5-14 days, and 3, IQR 1-8 days respectively, P < .001). Approximately one in five admitted patients occupying hospital beds did not meet the criteria for acute in-hospital stay or care at the time of the survey. Most delays were related to issues outside the immediate control of the hospital. Improvement programmes working with stakeholders focusing on the transfer from hospital to outside areas of care need to be further developed and may offer potential for the greatest gain. The DoCS can be a tool to periodically monitor changes and improvements in patient flow.

Can using the functional resonance analysis method, as an intervention, improve patient safety in hospitals?: a stepped wedge design protocol.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals are sometimes forced to adjust their work to varying conditions leading to discrepancies between hospital protocols and daily practice. We will examine the discrepancies between protocols, 'Work As Imagined' (WAI), and daily practice 'Work As Done' (WAD) to determine whether these adjustments are deliberate or accidental. The discrepancies between WAI and WAD can be visualised using the Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM). FRAM will be applied to three patient safety themes: risk screening of the frail older patients; the administration of high-risk medication; and performing medication reconciliation at discharge. METHODS: A stepped wedge design will be used to collect data over 16 months. The FRAM intervention consists of constructing WAI and WAD models by analysing hospital protocols and interviewing healthcare professionals, and a meeting with healthcare professionals in each ward to discuss the discrepancies between WAI and WAD. Safety indicators will be collected to monitor compliance rates. Additionally, the potential differences in resilience levels among nurses before and after the FRAM intervention will be measured using the Employee Resilience Scale (EmpRes) questionnaire. Lastly, we will monitor whether gaining insight into differences between WAI and WAD has led to behavioural and organisational change. DISCUSSION: This article will assess whether using FRAM to reveal possible discrepancies between hospital protocols (WAI) and daily practice (WAD) will improve compliance with safety indicators and employee resilience, and whether these insights will lead to behavioural and organisational change. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NL8778; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8778 . Registered 16 July 2020. Retrospectively registered.

Understanding what matters most to patients in acute care in seven countries, using the flash mob study design.

BACKGROUND: Truly patient-centred care needs to be aligned with what patients consider important, and is highly desirable in the first 24 h of an acute admission, as many decisions are made during this period. However, there is limited knowledge on what matters most to patients in this phase of their hospital stay. The objective of this study was to identify what mattered most to patients in acute care and to assess the patient perspective as to whether their treating doctors were aware of this. METHODS: This was a large-scale, qualitative, flash mob study, conducted simultaneously in sixty-six hospitals in seven countries, starting November 14th 2018, ending 50 h later. One thousand eight hundred fifty adults in the first 24 h of an acute medical admission were interviewed on what mattered most to them, why this mattered and whether they felt the treating doctor was aware of this. RESULTS: The most reported answers to "what matters most (and why)?" were 'getting better or being in good health' (why: to be with family/friends or pick-up life again), 'getting home' (why: more comfortable at home or to take care of someone) and 'having a diagnosis' (why: to feel less anxious or insecure). Of all patients, 51.9% felt the treating doctor did not know what mattered most to them. CONCLUSIONS: The priorities for acutely admitted patients were ostensibly disease- and care-oriented and thus in line with the hospitals' own priorities. However, answers to why these were important were diverse, more personal, and often related to psychological well-being and relations. A large group of patients felt their treating doctor did not know what mattered most to them. Explicitly asking patients what is important and why, could help healthcare professionals to get to know the person behind the patient, which is essential in delivering patient-centred care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR (Netherlands Trial Register) NTR7538 .

Unplanned return presentations of older patients to the emergency department: a root cause analysis.

BACKGROUND: In line with demographic changes, there is an increase in ED presentations and unplanned return presentations by older patients (≥70 years). It is important to know why these patients return to the ED shortly after their initial presentation. Therefore, the aim of this study was to provide insight into the root causes and potential preventability of unplanned return presentations (URP) to the ED within 30 days for older patients. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted from February 2018 to November 2018 in an academic hospital in Amsterdam. We included 83 patients, aged 70 years and older, with an URP to the ED within 30 days of the initial ED presentation. Patients, GPs and doctors at the ED were interviewed by trained interviewers and basic administrative data were collected in order to conduct a root cause analysis using the PRISMA-method. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-one root causes were identified and almost half (49%) of them were disease-related. Fifty-two percent of the patients returned to the ED within 7 days after the initial presentation. In 77% of the patients the URP was related to the initial presentation. Patients judged 17% of the URPs as potentially preventable, while doctors at the ED judged 25% and GPs 23% of the URPs as potentially preventable. In none of the cases, there was an overall agreement from all three perspectives on the judgement that an URP was potentially preventable. CONCLUSION: Disease-related factors were most often identified for an URP and half of the patients returned to the ED within 7 days. The majority of the URPs was judged as not preventable. However, an URP should trigger healthcare workers to focus on the patient's process of care and their needs and to anticipate on potential progression of disease. Future research should assess whether this may prevent that patients have to return to the ED.

A cross sectional study on the different domains of frailty for independent living older adults.

BACKGROUND: With the ageing population, there is a stronger focus on supporting older people to live independently as long as possible. One of the important factors to take into consideration for independent living older adults is frailty. This manuscript aims to provide insight into the relation between the different domains of frailty (physical, social and psychological or a combination), health outcomes and wellbeing aspects for independent living older adults. METHODS: This cross sectional community-based study included independent living older adults of 65 years and over who are member of a welfare organisation. The questionnaire contained items on background characteristics, health, quality of life, frailty (Tilburg Frailty Indicator), activities and loneliness. A multivariate analysis, one Way ANOVA's and chi-square tests with post-hoc analyses were used to identify significant differences between the following outcomes: Age, gender, marital status, living situation, income, health perception, number of conditions, activities of daily living, home care and informal care, Quality of life, loneliness, going outside, meeting people and the different domains of frailty. RESULTS: 1768 (35.1%) participants completed the questionnaire. 68.9% of the respondents was frail on one or multiple domains and 51.6% of the respondents was frail based on the total score on the TFI. Social frailty (18.4%) was most often present followed by 10.3% for frailty on all three domains of the TFI. All variables tested, except for income, showed significant differences between the different domains of frailty. CONCLUSION: Distinguishing the different domains of frailty provides information about the older adult's needs which is valuable for policymakers and care providers, to anticipate to the increasing number of independent living older adults and deliver them tailored care and support to contribute to their independent living situation and wellbeing.

What are the perceived added values and barriers of regulating long-term care in the home environment using a care network perspective: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Changes in Dutch policy towards long-term care led to the Dutch Health and Youth Care Inspectorate testing a regulatory framework focusing on care networks around older adults living independently. This regulatory activity involved all care providers and the older adults themselves. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with the older adults, and focus groups with care providers and inspectors were used to assess the perceived added value of, and barriers to the framework. RESULTS: The positive elements of this framework were the involvement of the older adults in the regulatory activity, the focus of the framework on care networks and the open character of the conversations with the inspectors. However, applying the framework requires a substantial investment of time. Care providers often did not perceive themselves as being part of a care network around one person and they expressed concerns about financial and privacy issues when thinking in terms of care networks. CONCLUSIONS: The experiences of the client were seen as important in regulating long-term care. Regulating care networks as a whole puts cooperation between care providers involved around one person on the agenda. However, barriers for this form of regulation were also perceived and, therefore, careful consideration when and how to regulate care networks is recommended.

Perspectives on the risks for older adults living independently.

Insight into risks concerning older adults living independently from their own perspective and their care provider's perspective is essential to address issues that may threaten their independent living. The most often mentioned perceived risks by older adults and their care providers in different regions in the Netherlands were: loneliness, falls, budget cuts in Dutch long-term care and not being able to call for help. The different perspectives of the respondents show a wide variety in risks, but also some similarities. The perspective of the frail older adults is required to gain insight into the priority of their perceived risks. An additional finding was the reluctance shown by the older adults to ask others in their social network for help. Results imply that possible preventive measures should not only focus on the medical or physical domain because older adults are likely to have other priorities to maintain self-reliance and live independently.

PRISMA Analysis of 30 Day Readmissions to a Tertiary Cancer Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Hospital readmissions are increasingly used as a quality indicator. Patients with cancer have an increased risk of readmission. The purpose of this study was to develop an in depth understanding of the causes of readmissions in patients undergoing cancer treatment using PRISMA methodology and was subsequently used to identify any potentially preventable causes of readmission in this cohort. METHODS: 50 consecutive 30 day readmissions from the 1st November 2014 to the medical admissions unit (MAU) at a specialist tertiary cancer hospital in the Northwest of England were analysed retrospectively. RESULTS: Q25(50%) of the patients were male with a median age of 59 years (range 19-81). PRISMA analysis showed that active (human) factors contributed to the readmission of 4 (8%) of the readmissions, which may have been potentially preventable. All of the readmissions were driven by a medical condition related to the patient's underlying cancer and ongoing cancer treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of readmissions of patients undergoing cancer treatment appear to be related to the underlying condition and, as such, are predictable but not preventable. This suggests that hospital readmission is not a good quality indicator in this cohort of patients.

Comparing Guidelines to Daily Practice When Screening Older Patients for the Risk of Functional Decline in Hospitals: Outcomes of a Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM) Study.

OBJECTIVES: Dutch hospitals are required to screen older patients for functional decline using 4 indicators: malnutrition, delirium, physical impairment, and falls, to recognize frail older patients promptly. The Functional Resonance Analysis Method was employed to deepen the understanding of work according to the protocols (work-as-imagined [WAI]) in contrast to the realities of daily practice (work-as-done [WAD]). METHODS: Data have been collected from 3 hospitals (2 tertiary and 1 general) and 4 different wards: an internal medicine ward, surgical ward, neurology ward, and a trauma geriatric ward. WAI models were based on national guidelines and hospital protocols. Data on WAD were collected through semistructured interviews with involved nurses (n = 30). RESULTS: Hospital protocols were more extensive than national guidelines for all screening indicators. Additional activities mainly comprised specific preventive interventions or follow-up assessments after adequate measurements. Key barriers identified to work according to protocols included time constraints, ambiguity regarding task ownership, nurses' perceived limitations in applying their clinical expertise due to time constraints, insufficient understanding of freedom-restricted interventions, and the inadequacy of the Delirium Observation Scale Score in patients with neurological and cognitive problems. Performance variability stemmed from timing issues, frequently attributable to time constraints. CONCLUSIONS: The most common reasons for deviating from the protocol are related to time constraints, lack of knowledge, and/or patient-related factors. Also, collaboration among relevant disciplines appears important to ensure good health outcomes. Future research endeavors could shed a light on the follow-up procedures of the screening process and roles of other disciplines, such as physiotherapists.

Value of the Safety Management System (VMS) frailty instrument as a frailty screener in care for older hospital patients: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Dutch hospitals are required to screen older patients for the risk of developing functional decline using the Safety Management System (VMS) which assesses four domains associated with functional decline; fall risk, risk of delirium, malnutrition, and physical impairment. PURPOSE: The aim is twofold, first to compare the VMS frailty instrument as a frailty screener with existing frailty instruments and second to provide an overview of the available evidence. METHODS: We performed a literature search to identify studies that used the VMS instrument as frailty screener to asses frailty or to predict adverse health outcomes in older hospitalized patients. Pubmed, Cinahl, and Embase were searched from January 1st 2008 to December 11th 2023. RESULTS: Our search yielded 603 articles, of which 17 studies with heterogenous populations and settings were included. Using the VMS, frailty was scored in six different ways. The agreement between VMS and other frailty instruments ranged from 57 to 87%. The highest sensitivity and specificity of VMS for frailty were 90% and 67%, respectively. The association of the VMS with outcomes was studied in 14 studies, VMS was predictive for complications, delirium, falls, length of stay, and adverse events. Conflicting results were found for hospital (re)admission, complications, change in living situation, functional decline, and mortality. CONCLUSION: The VMS frailty instrument were studied as a frailty screening instrument in various populations and settings. The value of the VMS instrument as a frailty screener looks promising. Our results suggest that the scoring method of the VMS could be adapted to specific requirements of settings or populations.

Fatal Adverse Events in Femoral Neck Fracture Patients Undergoing Hemiarthroplasty or Total Hip Arthroplasty-A Retrospective Record Review Study in a Nationwide Sample of Deceased Patients.

OBJECTIVES: Patient safety is a core component of quality of hospital care and measurable through adverse event (AE) rates. A high-risk group are femoral neck fracture patients. The Dutch clinical guideline states that the treatment of choice is cemented total hip arthroplasty (THA) or hemiarthroplasty (HA). We aimed to identify the prevalence of AEs related to THA/HA in a sample of patients who died in the hospital. METHODS: We used data of a nationwide retrospective record review study. Records were systematically reviewed for AEs, preventability and contribution to the patient's death. We drew a subsample of THA/HA AEs and analyzed these cases. RESULTS: Of the 2998 reviewed records, 38 patients underwent THA/HA, of whom 24 patients suffered 25 AEs (prevalence = 68.1%; 95% confidence interval, 51.4-81.2), and 24 contributed to death. Patients with a THA/HA AE were of high age (median = 82.5 y) and had severe comorbidity (Charlson score ≥5). The majority of THA/HA AEs had a patient-related cause and was considered partly preventable. Examples of suggested actions that might have prevented the AEs: refraining from surgery, adhering to medication guidelines, uncemented procedures, comprehensive presurgical geriatric assessment, and better postsurgical monitoring. DISCUSSION: Our study shows a high prevalence of (fatal) adverse events in patients undergoing THA/HA. This seems particularly valid for cemented implants in frail old patients, indicating room for improvement of patient safety in this group. Therefore, we recommend physicians to engage in comprehensive shared decision making with these patients and decide on a treatment fitting to a patient's preexisting health status, preferences, and values.

Stimulating implementation of clinical practice guidelines in hospital care from a central guideline organization perspective: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The uptake of guidelines in care is inconsistent. This review focuses on guideline implementation strategies used by guideline organizations (governmental agencies, scientific/professional societies and other umbrella organizations), experienced implementation barriers and facilitators and impact of their implementation efforts. METHODS: We searched PUBMED, EMBASE and CINAHL and conducted snowballing. Eligibility criteria included guidelines focused on hospital care and OECD countries. Study quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. We used framework analysis, narrative synthesis and summary statistics. RESULTS: Twenty-six articles were included. Sixty-two implementation strategies were reported, used in different combinations and ranged between 1 and 16 strategies per initiative. Most frequently reported strategies were educational session(s) and implementation supporting materials. The most commonly reported barrier and facilitator were respectively insufficient healthcare professionals' time and resources; and guideline's credibility, evidence base and relevance. Eighty-five percent of initiatives that measured impact achieved improvements in adoption, knowledge, behavior and/or clinical outcomes. No clear optimal approach for improving guideline uptake and impact was found. However, we found indications that employing multiple active implementation strategies and involving external organizations and hospital staff were associated with improvements. CONCLUSION: Guideline organizations employ diverse implementation strategies and encounter multiple barriers and facilitators. Our study uncovered potential effective implementation practices. However, further research is needed on effective tailoring of implementation approaches to increase uptake and impact of guidelines.

Scale, nature, preventability and causes of adverse events in hospitalised older patients.

OBJECTIVE: to gain insight into the scale, nature, preventability and causes of adverse events in hospitalised older patients. DESIGN: a three-stage retrospective, structured, medical record review study of 7,917 records of patients admitted in 21 Dutch hospitals in 2004. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: incidence, preventability, clinical process category, consequences and causes of adverse events in hospitalised patients of 65 years and older, compared with patients younger than 65. RESULTS: adverse events and preventable adverse events occur significantly more often in older patients [6.9% (95% CI: 5.9-8.0%) and 2.9% (95% CI: 2.3-3.7%), respectively] than in younger patients [4.8% (95% CI: 4.0-5.7%) and 1.8% (95% CI: 1.3-2.4%), respectively]. In older patients, the adverse events were more often related to medication (20.1 versus 9.6%) (P < 0.01). An exploration of the causes revealed that the inability to apply existing knowledge to a new and complex situation contributes more often to the occurrence of adverse events in older patients than in younger patients (36.4 versus 24.3%) (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: to reduce the number of adverse events in older patients in the future, more particular training of hospital staff in geriatric medicine is required, with a specific focus on medication.

Root Cause Analysis Using the Prevention and Recovery Information System for Monitoring and Analysis Method in Healthcare Facilities: A Systematic Literature Review.

OBJECTIVES: Unintended events (UEs) are prevalent in healthcare facilities, and learning from them is key to improve patient safety. The Prevention and Recovery Information System for Monitoring and Analysis (PRISMA)-method is a root cause analysis method used in healthcare facilities. The aims of this systematic review are to map the use of the PRISMA-method in healthcare facilities worldwide, to assess the insights that the PRISMA-method offers, and to propose recommendations to increase its usability in healthcare facilities. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE.com, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library were systematically searched from inception to February 26, 2020. Studies were included if the PRISMA-method for analyzing UEs was applied in healthcare facilities. A quality appraisal was performed, and relevant data based on an appraisal checklist were extracted. RESULTS: The search provided 2773 references, of which 25 articles reporting 10,816 UEs met our inclusion criteria. The most frequently identified root causes were human-related, followed by organizational factors. Most studies took place in the Netherlands (n = 20), and the sample size ranged from 1 to 2028 UEs. The study setting and collected data used for PRISMA varied widely. The PRISMA-method performed by multiple persons resulted in more root causes per event. CONCLUSIONS: To better understand UEs in healthcare facilities and formulate optimal countermeasures, our recommendations to further improve the PRISMA-method mainly focus on combining information from patient files and reports with interviews, including multiple PRISMA-trained researchers in an analysis, and modify the Eindhoven Classification Model if needed.

Experiences and perspectives of older patients with a return visit to the emergency department within 30 days: patient journey mapping.

PURPOSE: Up to 22% of older patients who visit the emergency department (ED) have a return visit within 30 days. To achieve patient-centered care for this group at the ED it is important to involve the patient perspective and strive to provide the best possible experience. The aim of this study was to gain insight into the experiences and perspectives of older patients from initial to return ED visit by mapping their patient journey. METHODS: We performed a qualitative patient journey study with 13 patients of 70 years and older with a return ED visit within 30 days who presented at the Amsterdam UMC, a Dutch academic hospital. We used semi-structured interviews focusing on the patient experience during their journey and developed a conceptual framework for coding. RESULTS: Our sample consisted of 13 older patients with an average age of 80 years, and 62% of them were males. The framework contained a timeline of the patient journey with five chronological main themes, complemented with an 'experience' theme, these were divided into 34 subthemes. Health status, social system, contact with the general practitioner, aftercare, discharge and expectations were the five main themes. The experiences regarding these themes differed greatly between patients. The two most prominent subthemes were waiting time and discharge communication, which were mostly related to a negative experience. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insight into the experiences and perspectives of older patients from initial to return ED visit. The two major findings were that lack of clarity regarding waiting times and suboptimal discharge communication contributed to negative experiences. Recommendations regarding waiting time (i.e. a two-hour time out at the ED), and discharge communication (i.e. checklist for discharge) could contribute to a positive ED experience and thereby potentially improve patient-centered care.

Patient-nurse agreement on inpatient sleep and sleep disturbing factors.

Background: Sleep is vital for recovery during hospital stay. Many sleep-promoting interventions have been investigated in the past. Nurses seem to overestimate their patients sleep and their perspective is needed for these interventions to be successfully implemented. Objectives: To assess the patient's and nurse's agreement on the patient's sleep and factors disturbing sleep. Methods: The instruments used included 1) five Richard-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ) items plus a rating of nighttime noise and 2) the Consensus Sleep Diary (CSD). The mean of the five RCSQ items comprised a total score, which reflects sleep quality. Once a week, unannounced, nurses and patients were asked to fill in questionnaires concerning last night's sleep. Neither nurses nor patients knew the others' ratings. Patient-nurse agreement was evaluated by using median differences and Bland-Altman plots. Reliability was evaluated by using intraclass correlation coefficients. Results: Fifty-five paired patient-nurse assessments have been completed. For all RCSQ subitems, nurses' scores were higher (indicating "better" sleep) than patients' scores, with a significantly higher rating for sleep depth (median [IQR], 70 [40] vs 50 [40], P = .012). The Bland-Altman plots for the RSCQ Total Score (r = 0.0593, P = .008) revealed a significant amount of variation (bias). The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) indicated poor reliability for all 7 measures (range -0.278 - 0.435). Nurses were relatively overestimating their own role in causing sleep disturbances and underestimating patient-related factors. Conclusions: Nurses tend to overestimate patients' sleep quality as well as their own role in causing sleep disturbances.

Evaluation of Nonpharmacologic Interventions and Sleep Outcomes in Hospitalized Medical and Surgical Patients: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.

Importance: Inadequate sleep negatively affects patients' physical health, mental well-being, and recovery. Nonpharmacologic interventions are recommended as first-choice treatment. However, studies evaluating the interventions are often of poor quality and show equivocal results. Objective: To assess whether the implementation of nonpharmacologic interventions is associated with improved inpatient night sleep. Design, Setting, and Participants: In a nonrandomized controlled trial, patients were recruited on the acute medical unit and medical and surgical wards of a Dutch academic hospital. All adults who spent exactly 1 full night in the hospital were recruited between September 1, 2019, and May 31, 2020 (control group), received usual care. Patients recruited between September 1, 2020, and May 31, 2021, served as the intervention group. The intervention group received earplugs, an eye mask, and aromatherapy. Nurses received sleep-hygiene training, and in the acute medical unit, the morning medication and vital sign measurement rounds were postponed from the night shift to the day shift. All interventions were developed in collaboration with patients, nurses, and physicians. Main Outcomes and Measures: Sleep was measured using actigraphy and the Dutch-Flemish Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System sleep disturbance item bank. Other outcomes included patient-reported sleep disturbing factors and the use of sleep-enhancing tools. Results: A total of 374 patients were included (222 control, 152 intervention; median age, 65 [IQR, 52-74] years). Of these, 331 were included in the analysis (195 [59%] men). Most patients (138 [77%] control, 127 [84%] intervention) were in the acute medical unit. The total sleep time was 40 minutes longer in the intervention group (control: median, 6 hours and 5 minutes [IQR, 4 hours and 55 minutes to 7 hours and 4 minutes]; intervention: 6 hours and 45 minutes [IQR, 5 hours and 47 minutes to 7 hours and 39 minutes]; P < .001). This was mainly due to a 30-minute delay in final wake time (median clock-time: control, 6:30 am [IQR, 6:00 am to 7:22 am]; intervention, 7:00 am [IQR, 6:30-7:30 am]; P < .001). Sleep quality did not differ significantly between groups. For both groups, the main sleep-disturbing factors were noises, pain, toilet visits, and being awakened by hospital staff. Sleep masks (23 of 147 [16%]) and earplugs (17 of 147 [12%]) were used most. Nightly vital sign checks decreased significantly (control: 54%; intervention: 11%; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that sleep of hospitalized patients may be significantly improved with nonpharmacologic interventions. Postponement of morning vital sign checks and medication administration rounds from the night to the day shift may be a useful way to achieve this. Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Registry Identifier: NL7995.

Sleep in hospitalized pediatric and adult patients - A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Sleep is essential for recovery from illness. As a result, researchers have shown a growing interest in the sleep of hospitalized patients. Although many studies have been conducted over the past years, an up to date systematic review of the results is missing. Objective: The objective of this systematic review was to assess sleep quality and quantity of hospitalized patients and sleep disturbing factors. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted within four scientific databases. The search focused on synonyms of 'sleep' and 'hospitalization'. Papers written in English or Dutch from inception to April 25th,2022 were included for hospitalized patients >1 year of age. Papers exclusively reporting about patients receiving palliative, obstetric or psychiatric care were excluded, as well as patients in rehabilitation and intensive care settings, and long-term hospitalized geriatric patients. This review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Results: Out of 542 full text studies assessed for eligibility, 203 were included, describing sleep quality and/or quantity of 17,964 patients. The median sample size of the studies was 51 patients (IQR 67, range 6-1472). An exploratory meta-analysis of the Total Sleep Time showed an average of 7.2 h (95%-CI 4.3, 10.2) in hospitalized children, 5.7 h (95%-CI 4.8, 6.7) in adults and 5.8 h (95%-CI 5.3, 6.4) in older patients (>60y). In addition, a meta-analysis of the Wake After Sleep Onset (WASO) showed a combined high average of 1.8 h (95%-CI 0.7, 2.9). Overall sleep quality was poor, also due to nocturnal awakenings. The most frequently cited external factors for poor sleep were noise and number of patients in the room. Among the variety of internal/disease-related factors, pain and anxiety were most frequently mentioned to be associated with poor sleep. Conclusion: Of all studies, 76% reported poor sleep quality and insufficient sleep duration in hospitalized patients. Children sleep on average 0.7-3.8 h less in the hospital than recommended. Hospitalized adults sleep 1.3-3.2 h less than recommended for healthy people. This underscores the need for interventions to improve sleep during hospitalization to support recovery.