Re-Purposing the Ordering of Routine Laboratory Tests in Hospitalized Medical Patients (RePORT): protocol for a multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial to evaluate the impact of a multicomponent intervention bundle to reduce laboratory test over-utilization.

BACKGROUND: Laboratory test overuse in hospitals is a form of healthcare waste that also harms patients. Developing and evaluating interventions to reduce this form of healthcare waste is critical. We detail the protocol for our study which aims to implement and evaluate the impact of an evidence-based, multicomponent intervention bundle on repetitive use of routine laboratory testing in hospitalized medical patients across adult hospitals in the province of British Columbia, Canada. METHODS: We have designed a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial to assess the impact of a multicomponent intervention bundle across 16 hospitals in the province of British Columbia in Canada. We will use the Knowledge to Action cycle to guide implementation and the RE-AIM framework to guide evaluation of the intervention bundle. The primary outcome will be the number of routine laboratory tests ordered per patient-day in the intervention versus control periods. Secondary outcome measures will assess implementation fidelity, number of all common laboratory tests used, impact on healthcare costs, and safety outcomes. The study will include patients admitted to adult medical wards (internal medicine or family medicine) and healthcare providers working in these wards within the participating hospitals. After a baseline period of 24 weeks, we will conduct a 16-week pilot at one hospital site. A new cluster (containing approximately 2-3 hospitals) will receive the intervention every 12 weeks. We will evaluate the sustainability of implementation at 24 weeks post implementation of the final cluster. Using intention to treat, we will use generalized linear mixed models for analysis to evaluate the impact of the intervention on outcomes. DISCUSSION: The study builds upon a multicomponent intervention bundle that has previously demonstrated effectiveness. The elements of the intervention bundle are easily adaptable to other settings, facilitating future adoption in wider contexts. The study outputs are expected to have a positive impact as they will reduce usage of repetitive laboratory tests and provide empirically supported measures and tools for accomplishing this work. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was prospectively registered on April 8, 2024, via ClinicalTrials.gov Protocols Registration and Results System (NCT06359587). https://classic. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT06359587?term=NCT06359587&recrs=ab&draw=2&rank=1.

Examining the Needs of Family Caregivers of People Living with Dementia in the Community during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a disproportionate effect on older adults and their family caregivers (FCGs). For FCGs, the pandemic has impacted almost every dimension of their lives and caregiving routines, from their own risk of becoming ill to their access to resources that support caregiving. The purpose of this mixed-methods study was to examine the impact of COVID-19 on FCGs' ability to provide care for their family member with dementia. A total of 115 FCGs who identified as having their family member living with dementia residing in the community completed the survey. Ten family caregivers participated in the follow-up focus groups. Recommendations to address the needs of FCGs now and in the future include: (1) making resources for care provision consistently available and tailored, (2) providing support for navigating the health care system, and (3) supplying concise information on how to provide care during public health emergencies.

Prediction of major postoperative events after non-cardiac surgery for people with kidney failure: derivation and internal validation of risk models.

BACKGROUND: People with kidney failure often require surgery and experience worse postoperative outcomes compared to the general population, but existing risk prediction tools have excluded those with kidney failure during development or exhibit poor performance. Our objective was to derive, internally validate, and estimate the clinical utility of risk prediction models for people with kidney failure undergoing non-cardiac surgery. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND MEASURES: This study involved derivation and internal validation of prognostic risk prediction models using a retrospective, population-based cohort. We identified adults from Alberta, Canada with pre-existing kidney failure (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] < 15 mL/min/1.73m2 or receipt of maintenance dialysis) undergoing non-cardiac surgery between 2005-2019. Three nested prognostic risk prediction models were assembled using clinical and logistical rationale. Model 1 included age, sex, dialysis modality, surgery type and setting. Model 2 added comorbidities, and Model 3 added preoperative hemoglobin and albumin. Death or major cardiac events (acute myocardial infarction or nonfatal ventricular arrhythmia) within 30 days after surgery were modelled using logistic regression models. RESULTS: The development cohort included 38,541 surgeries, with 1,204 outcomes (after 3.1% of surgeries); 61% were performed in males, the median age was 64 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 53, 73), and 61% were receiving hemodialysis at the time of surgery. All three internally validated models performed well, with c-statistics ranging from 0.783 (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 0.770, 0.797) for Model 1 to 0.818 (95%CI: 0.803, 0.826) for Model 3. Calibration slopes and intercepts were excellent for all models, though Models 2 and 3 demonstrated improvement in net reclassification. Decision curve analysis estimated that use of any model to guide perioperative interventions such as cardiac monitoring would result in potential net benefit over default strategies. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and internally validated three novel models to predict major clinical events for people with kidney failure having surgery. Models including comorbidities and laboratory variables showed improved accuracy of risk stratification and provided the greatest potential net benefit for guiding perioperative decisions. Once externally validated, these models may inform perioperative shared decision making and risk-guided strategies for this population.

Association of Kidney Function With Major Postoperative Events After Noncardiac Ambulatory Surgeries: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to estimate the association between estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or death after ambulatory noncardiac surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: People with chronic kidney disease (CKD) commonly undergo surgical procedures. Although most are performed in an ambulatory setting, the risk of major perioperative outcomes after ambulatory surgery for people with CKD is unknown. METHODS: In this retrospective population-based cohort study using administrative health data from Alberta, Canada, we included adults with measured preoperative kidney function undergoing ambulatory noncardiac surgery between April 1, 2005 and February 28, 2017. Participants were categorized into 6 eGFR categories (in mL/min/1.73m 2 )of ≥60 (G1-2), 45 to 59 (G3a), 30 to 44 (G3b), 15 to 29 (G4), <15 not receiving dialysis (G5ND), and those receiving chronic dialysis (G5D). The odds of AMI or death within 30 days of surgery were estimated using multivariable generalized estimating equation models. RESULTS: We identified 543,160 procedures in 323,521 people with a median age of 66 years (IQR 56-76); 52% were female. Overall, 2338 people (0.7%) died or had an AMI within 30 days of surgery. Compared with the G1-2 category, the adjusted odds ratio of death or AMI increased from 1.1 (95% confidence interval: 1.0-1.3) for G3a to 3.1 (2.6-3.6) for G5D. Emergency Department and Urgent Care Center visits within 30 days were frequent (17%), though similar across eGFR categories. CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory surgery was associated with a low risk of major postoperative events. This risk was higher for people with CKD, which may inform their perioperative shared decision-making and management.

Perioperative management for people with kidney failure receiving dialysis: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: People with kidney failure receiving dialysis (CKD-G5D) are more likely to undergo surgery and experience poorer postoperative outcomes than those without kidney failure. In this scoping review, we aimed to systematically identify and summarize perioperative strategies, protocols, pathways, and interventions that have been studied or implemented for people with CKD-G5D. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Controlled Trials registry (inception to February 2020), in addition to an extensive grey literature search, for sources that reported on a perioperative strategy to guide management for people with CKD-G5D. We summarized the overall study characteristics and perioperative management strategies and identified evidence gaps based on surgery type and perioperative domain. Publication trends over time were assessed, stratified by surgery type and study design. RESULTS: We included 183 studies; the most common study design was a randomized controlled trial (27%), with 67% of publications focused on either kidney transplantation or dialysis vascular access. Transplant-related studies often focused on fluid and volume management strategies and risk stratification, whereas dialysis vascular access studies focused most often on imaging. The number of publications increased over time, across all surgery types, though driven by non-randomized study designs. CONCLUSIONS: Despite many current gaps in perioperative research for patients with CKD-G5D, evidence generation supporting perioperative management is increasing, with recent growth driven primarily by non-randomized studies. Our review may inform organization of evidence-based strategies into perioperative care pathways where evidence is available while also highlighting gaps that future perioperative research can address.

Public Health Messaging during the COVID-19 Pandemic and Its Impact on Family Caregivers' COVID-19 Knowledge.

BACKGROUND: Enabling accurate, accessible public health messaging is a critical role of public health officials during a pandemic, but family caregivers of people living with dementia (PLWD) have rarely been specifically addressed in public health messaging. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine how family caregivers for people living with dementia access and evaluate public health messaging in Alberta. METHOD: An online survey was conducted with family caregivers for PLWD (n = 217). RESULTS: Most respondents rated public health messaging as good or excellent (63.9%), but specific information about how to access caregiving information (69.5%) and what to expect in the future (49.1%) was rated as less than good. Family caregivers also identified how to care for a PLWD during the pandemic (57.5%) as a key information need. Healthcare providers/workers were the least frequently used source of public health messaging. Almost all family caregivers (94.4%) rated their own COVID-19 knowledge as good or excellent. DISCUSSION: Tailored, context-driven public health messaging for family caregivers of PLWD is critically needed.

A multi-step approach to developing a health system evaluation framework for community-based health care.

BACKGROUND: Community-based health care (CBHC) is a shift towards healthcare integration and community services closer to home. Variation in system approaches harkens the need for a conceptual framework to evaluate outcomes and impacts. We set out to develop a CBHC-specific evaluation framework in the context of a provincial ministry of health planning process in Canada. METHODS: A multi-step approach was used to develop the CBHC evaluation framework. Modified Delphi informed conceptualization and prioritization of indicators. Formative research identified evaluation framework elements (triple aim, global measures, and impact), health system levels (tiers), and potential CBHC indicators (n = 461). Two Delphi rounds were held. Round 1, panelists independently ranked indicators on CBHC relevance and health system tiering. Results were analyzed by coding agreement/disagreement frequency and central tendency measures. Round 2, a consensus meeting was used to discuss disagreement, identify Tier 1 indicators and concepts, and define indicators not relevant to CBHC (Tier 4). Post-Delphi, indicators and concepts were refined, Tier 1 concepts mapped to the evaluation framework, and indicator narratives developed. Three stakeholder consultations (scientific, government, and public/patient communities) were held for endorsement and recommendation. RESULTS: Round 1 Delphi results showed agreement for 300 and disagreement for 161 indicators. Round 2 consensus resulted in 103 top tier indicators (Tier 1 = 19, Tier 2 = 84), 358 bottom Tier 3 and 4 indicators, non-CBHC measure definitions, and eight Tier 1 indicator concepts-Mortality/Suicide; Quality of Life, and Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Global Patient Reported Experience Measures; Cost of Care, Access to Integrated Primary Care; Avoidable Emergency Department Use; Avoidable Hospitalization; and E-health Penetration. Post Delphi results refined Tier 3 (n = 289) and 4 (n = 69) indicators, and identified 18 Tier 2 and 3 concepts. When mapped to the evaluation framework, Tier 1 concepts showed full coverage across the elements. 'Indicator narratives' depicted systemness and integration for evaluating CBHC. Stakeholder consultations affirmed endorsement of the approach and evaluation framework; refined concepts; and provided key considerations to further operationalize and contextualize indicators, and evaluate CBHC as a health system approach. CONCLUSIONS: This research produced a novel evaluation framework to conceptualize and evaluate CBHC initiatives. The evaluation framework revealed the importance of a health system approach for evaluating CBHC.

Family Caregiving for People Living With Dementia During COVID-19: A Thematic Analysis.

This study examines the experiences and needs of family caregivers (FCGs) for people living with dementia (PLWD) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Six focus groups were conducted with 21 FCGs from across the care continuum and thematic analysis was used to illuminate FCGs descriptions of their experiences and needs. Three main themes were identified that highlight the disruption the pandemic caused for FCGs: changes in the caregiving role, information use and needs, and mental and physical health outcomes. To better support FCGs during COVID-19 and future public health emergencies, we recommend that (a) information is accessible, specific, and centralized; (b) resources are tailored to the caregiving dyad (FCG and PLWD) and creatively adapted to public health restrictions; and (c) opportunities for the caregiving dyad to receive physical, social, and emotional engagement and support are maintained.

Tailored, Community-Based Programs for People Living With Dementia and Their Family Caregiver.

People living with dementia (PLWD) have voiced a desire to remain in their home environment as long as possible; unfortunately, there is limited integrated person-and family-centered community support. To examine the need for tailored supports for PLWD and their family caregivers (caregiving dyad), a meeting was conducted in Spring 2020. Thirty key provincial stakeholders with diversity in geographic location, employer and/or organization, range of roles, and family representatives participated in the meeting. Stakeholders identified a series of gaps, including: (a) systemic gaps; (b) gaps between communities of practice; (c) underserved populations; (d) program content and delivery gaps; and (e) PLWD and family caregiver support gaps. With input from stakeholders, we highlighted the need for consistent resources for the caregiving dyad that are flexible, timely, and accessible, which are embedded in the community and led by qualified and trained staff. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 48(4), 26-32.].

Patients' Use of Mobile Health for Self-management of Knee Osteoarthritis: Results of a 6-Week Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: In a previous study, a prototype mobile health (mHealth) app was co-designed with patients, family physicians, and researchers to enhance self-management and optimize conservative management for patients with mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis (OA). OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the overall usability, quality, and effectiveness of the mHealth app prototype for aiding knee OA self-management from the perspectives of patients with OA and health care providers (HCPs). METHODS: Using methods triangulation of qualitative and quantitative data, we conducted a pilot evaluation of an mHealth app prototype that was codeveloped with patients and HCPs. We recruited adult patients aged ≥20 years with early knee OA (n=18) who experienced knee pain on most days of the month at any time in the past and HCPs (n=7) to participate. In the qualitative assessment, patient and HCP perspectives were elicited on the likeability and usefulness of app features and functionalities and the perceived impact of the app on patient-HCP communication. The quantitative assessment involved evaluating the app using usability, quality, and effectiveness metrics. Patient baseline assessments included a semistructured interview and survey to gather demographics and assess the quality of life (European Quality-of-Life 5-Dimension 5-Level Questionnaire [EQ-5D-5L]) and patient activation (patient activation measure [PAM]). Following the 6-week usability trial period, a follow-up survey assessed patients' perceptions of app usability and quality and longitudinal changes in quality of life and patient activation. Semistructured interviews and surveys were also conducted with HCPs (n=7) at baseline to evaluate the usability and quality of the app prototype. RESULTS: Interviews with patients and HCPs revealed overall positive impressions of the app prototype features and functionalities related to likeability and usefulness. Between the baseline and follow-up patient assessments, the mean EQ-5D-5L scores improved from 0.77 to 0.67 (P=.04), and PAM scores increased from 80.4 to 87.9 (P=.01). Following the 6-week evaluation, patients reported a mean System Usability Scale (SUS) score of 57.8, indicating marginal acceptability according to SUS cutoffs. The mean number of goals set during the usability period was 2.47 (SD 3.08), and the mean number of activities completed for knee OA self-management during the study period was 22.2 (SD 17.8). Spearman rank correlation (rs) calculations revealed that the follow-up PAM scores were weakly correlated (rs=-0.32) with the number of goals achieved and the number (rs=0.19) of activities performed during the 6-week usability period. HCPs reported a mean SUS score of 39.1, indicating unacceptable usability. CONCLUSIONS: This evidence-based and patient-centered app prototype represents a potential use of mHealth for improving outcomes and enhancing conservative care by promoting patient activation and patient-HCP communication regarding OA management. However, future iterations of the app prototype are required to address the limitations related to usability and quality.

Mortality and cardiovascular events in adults with kidney failure after major non-cardiac surgery: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: People with kidney failure have a high incidence of major surgery, though the risk of perioperative outcomes at a population-level is unknown. Our objective was to estimate the proportion of people with kidney failure that experience acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or death within 30 days of major non-cardiac surgery, based on surgery type. METHODS: In this retrospective population-based cohort study, we used administrative health data to identify adults from Alberta, Canada with major surgery between April 12,005 and February 282,017 that had preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs) < 15 mL/min/1.73m2 or received chronic dialysis. The index surgical procedure for each participant was categorized within one of fourteen surgical groupings based on Canadian Classification of Health Interventions (CCI) codes applied to hospitalization administrative datasets. We estimated the proportion of people that had AMI or died within 30 days of the index surgical procedure (with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) following logistic regression, stratified by surgery type. RESULTS: Overall, 3398 people had a major surgery (1905 hemodialysis; 590 peritoneal dialysis; 903 non-dialysis). Participants were more likely male (61.0%) with a median age of 61.5 years (IQR 50.0-72.7). Within 30 days of surgery, 272 people (8.0%) had an AMI or died. The probability was lowest following ophthalmologic surgery at 1.9% (95%CI: 0.5, 7.3) and kidney transplantation at 2.1% (95%CI: 1.3, 3.2). Several types of surgery were associated with greater than one in ten risk of AMI or death, including retroperitoneal (10.0% [95%CI: 2.5, 32.4]), intra-abdominal (11.7% [8.7, 15.5]), skin and soft tissue (12.1% [7.4, 19.1]), musculoskeletal (MSK) (12.3% [9.9, 15.5]), vascular (12.6% [10.2, 15.4]), anorectal (14.7% [6.3, 30.8]), and neurosurgical procedures (38.1% [20.3, 59.8]). Urgent or emergent procedures had the highest risk, with 12.1% experiencing AMI or death (95%CI: 10.7, 13.6) compared with 2.6% (1.9, 3.5) following elective surgery. CONCLUSIONS: After major non-cardiac surgery, the risk of death or AMI for people with kidney failure varies significantly based on surgery type. This study informs our understanding of surgery type and risk for people with kidney failure. Future research should focus on identifying high risk patients and strategies to reduce these risks.

COVID-19 and Long-Term Care: the Essential Role of Family Caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Those most at risk from severe COVID-19 infection are older adults; therefore, long-term care (LTC) facilities closed their doors to visitors and family caregivers (FCGs) during the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The most common chronic health condition among LTC residents is dementia, and persons living with dementia (PLWD) rely on FCGs to maintain their care provision. This study aims to evaluate the impact of visitor restrictions and resulting loss of FCGs providing in-person care to PLWD in LTC during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: An online survey and follow-up focus groups were conducted June to September 2020 (n=70). Mixed quantitative (descriptive statistics) and qualitative (thematic analysis) methods were used to evaluate study data. RESULTS: FCGs were unable to provide in-person care and while alternative communication methods were offered, they were not always effective. FCGs experienced negative outcomes including social isolation (66%), strain (63%), and reduced quality of life (57%). PLWD showed an increase in responsive behaviours (51%) and dementia progression. Consequently, 85% of FCGs indicated they are willing to undergo specialized training to maintain access to their PLWD. CONCLUSION: FCGs need continuous access to PLWD they care for in LTC to continue providing essential care.

Hospital-Acquired Conditions Reduction Program, Patient Safety, and Magnet Designation in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to investigate the association between hospitals' nursing excellence accreditation and patient safety performance-measured by the Hospital-Acquired Conditions Reduction Program (HACRP). METHODS: We linked data from the American Nursing Credentialing Center Magnet Recognition Program, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services HACRP, and the American Hospital Association annual survey from 2014 to 2016. We constrained the analysis to hospitals participating in Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' HACRP and deployed propensity score matching models to calculate the coefficients for our HACRP patient safety measures. These measures consisted of (a) patient safety indicator 90, (b) hospital-associated infection measures, and (c) total HAC scores. In addition, we used propensity score matching to assess HACRP scores between hospitals achieving Magnet recognition in the past 2 versus longer and within the past 5 years versus longer. RESULTS: Our primary findings indicate that Magnet hospitals have an increased likelihood of experiencing lower patient safety indicator 90 scores, higher catheter-associated urinary tract infection and surgical site infection scores, and no different total HAC scores. Finally, when examining the impact of Magnet tenure, our analysis revealed that there were no differences in Magnet tenure. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that the processes, procedures, and educational aspects associated with Magnet recognition seem to provide important improvements associated with care that is controlled by nursing practice. However, because these improvements do not differ when comparing total HAC scores nor Magnet hospitals with different tenure, there are likely opportunities for Magnet hospitals to continue process improvements focused on HACRP scores.

Estimated GFR and Incidence of Major Surgery: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Kidney disease is associated with an increased risk for postoperative morbidity and mortality. However, the incidence of major surgery on a population level is unknown. We aimed to determine the incidence of major surgery by level of kidney function. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study with entry from January 1, 2008, through December 31, 2009, and outcome surveillance from January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2016. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Population-based study using administrative health data from Alberta, Canada; adults with an outpatient serum creatinine measurement or receiving maintenance dialysis formed the study cohort. EXPOSURE: Participants were categorized into 6 estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) categories: ≥60 (G1-G2), 45 to 59 (G3a), 30 to 44 (G3b), 15 to 29 (G4), and<15mL/min/1.73m2 with (G5D) and without (G5) dialysis. eGFR was examined as a time-varying exposure based on means of measurements within 3-month ascertainment periods throughout the study period. OUTCOME: Major surgery defined as surgery requiring admission to the hospital for at least 24 hours. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Incidence rates (IRs) for overall major surgery were estimated using quasi-Poisson regression and adjusted for age, sex, income, location of residence, albuminuria, and Charlson comorbid conditions. Age- and sex-stratified IRs of 13 surgery subtypes were also estimated. RESULTS: 1,455,512 cohort participants were followed up for a median of 7.0 (IQR, 5.3) years, during which time 241,989 (16.6%) underwent a major surgery. Age and sex modified the relationship between eGFR and incidence of surgery. Men younger than 65 years receiving maintenance dialysis experienced the highest rates of major surgery, with an adjusted IR of 243.8 (95% CI, 179.8-330.6) per 1,000 person-years. There was a consistent trend of increasing surgery rates at lower eGFRs for most subtypes of surgery. LIMITATIONS: Outpatient preoperative serum creatinine measurement was necessary for inclusion and outpatient surgical procedures were not included. CONCLUSIONS: People with reduced eGFR have a significantly higher incidence of major surgery compared with those with normal eGFR, and age and sex modify this increased risk. This study informs our understanding of how surgical burden changes with differing levels of kidney function.

Perioperative management for people with chronic kidney disease receiving dialysis undergoing major surgery: a protocol for a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: People with chronic kidney disease receiving dialysis (CKD G5D) have an increased risk of poor postoperative outcomes and a high incidence of major surgery. Despite the high burden of these combined risks, there is a paucity of evidence to support tailored perioperative strategies to manage this population. A comprehensive evidence synthesis would inform the management of these patients in the perioperative period and identify knowledge gaps. We describe a protocol for a scoping review of the literature to identify existing perioperative strategies, protocols, pathways and interventions for people with CKD G5D undergoing major surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a scoping review in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and report per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews. In February 2020, we will complete our search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry for published literature from inception to present. All study types are eligible for inclusion, without language restriction. Studies reporting a perioperative intervention in adult patients with CKD G5D are eligible for inclusion. Studies in prevalent kidney transplant patients or patients with acute kidney injury, and studies that report on surgical approaches without consideration of perioperative management strategies, will be excluded. Reviewers will independently assess abstracts for all identified studies in duplicate, and again at the full-text stage. Following published literature searches, a search of the grey literature will be developed. We will extract and narratively report study, participant and intervention details. This will include a summary table outlining the strategies employed, organised into post hoc developed perioperative domains. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical considerations do not apply to this scoping review. Findings will be disseminated through relevant conference presentations and publications.

Variations in Workplace Safety Climate Perceptions and Outcomes Across Healthcare Provider Positions.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Injury rates reported among healthcare practitioners tend to vary depending on position. Nurses and healthcare aides report different rates of injury, which suggests that position and job duties may be key injury antecedents. The outcomes related to workplace safety climate perceptions (e.g., injury rates, job satisfaction, turnover) require reflection to identify antecedents of safety perception. The purpose of this study was to examine workplace safety perceptions and well-being (e.g., stress, job satisfaction) of healthcare practitioners by position. A cross-sectional survey of care teams (e.g., nurses, healthcare aides, allied health professionals) was conducted across three inpatient units. Data (N = 144) were analyzed using hierarchical linear regression and binomial logistic regression to examine the relationship between safety climate and self-reported injuries and ANOVA to determine variations in safety climate perceptions by position. Results indicated that nurses, healthcare aides, and allied health professionals report differing levels of workplace safety climate perceptions. Nurses reported the poorest safety perceptions, lowest job satisfaction, and highest stress, while allied health professionals reported the highest safety perceptions and job satisfaction and the lowest stress. Safety climate perceptions were found to be significantly related to care practitioner reported stress, turnover intent, and job satisfaction. Considering the importance of safety climate perceptions for the well-being of care practitioners, healthcare organizations need to prioritize workplace safety to optimize practitioners' perceptions. This study makes a unique contribution to the safety climate literature by identifying the variation in safety climate perceptions by care practitioner position. Practical implications are offered for enhancing workplace safety perceptions.

Magnetic work environments: Patient experience outcomes in Magnet versus non-Magnet hospitals.

BACKGROUND: The term Magnet hospital is an official designation ascribed by the American Nurses Credentialing Center for hospitals that meet specific criteria indicating they have a "magnetic work environment" for nurses. The objective of the Magnet designation is to encourage hospitals to design work in such a way as to attract and retain high-quality nurses and thus improve the quality of patient care. Empirical research has demonstrated that hospitals who earn a Magnet designation appear to have nurses who are more satisfied and committed to their work environments. Although research on whether patients are more satisfied with their care in these hospitals is still in its infancy, preliminary studies suggest that patients receiving care at Magnet-designated hospitals report more positive care experiences. PURPOSE: This study used a large secondary survey data set to explore the extent to which inpatient perceptions differed between Magnet and non-Magnet hospitals. METHODOLOGY: Ordinal logistic and multinomial logistic regression analyses were used to examine whether Magnet hospital status and positive nurse communication are related to overall hospital rating and willingness of patients to recommend the hospital. RESULTS: Results indicated that patients treated at a Magnet hospital and patients who rated nurses' communication highly were significantly more satisfied and more likely to say they would recommend the hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from this study suggests that it would be worthwhile for hospital leaders to consider organizational policies and practices consistent with the criteria put forth for Magnet hospital designation.

Expert Recommendations on Frequency of Utilization of Common Laboratory Tests in Medical Inpatients: a Canadian Consensus Study.

BACKGROUND: Repetitive inpatient laboratory testing in the face of clinical stability is a marker of low-value care. However, for commonly encountered clinical scenarios on medical units, there are no guidelines defining appropriate use criteria for laboratory tests. OBJECTIVE: This study seeks to establish consensus-based recommendations for the utilization of common laboratory tests in medical inpatients. DESIGN: This study uses a modified Delphi method. Participants completed two rounds of an online survey to determine appropriate testing frequencies for selected laboratory tests in commonly encountered clinical scenarios. Consensus was defined as agreement by at least 80% of participants. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were 36 experts in internal medicine across Canada defined as internists in independent practice for ≥ 5 years with experience in medical education, quality improvement, or both. Experts represented 8 of the 10 Canadian provinces and 13 of 17 academic institutions. MAIN MEASURES: Laboratory tests and clinical scenarios included were those that were considered common on medical units. The final survey contained a total of 45 clinical scenarios looking at the utilization of six laboratory tests (complete blood count, electrolytes, creatinine, urea, international normalized ratio, and partial thromboplastin time). The possible frequency choices were every 2-4 h, 6-8 h, twice a day, daily, every 2-3 days, weekly, or none unless there was specific diagnostic suspicion. These scenarios were reviewed by two internists with training in quality improvement and survey methods. KEY RESULTS: Of the 45 initial clinical scenarios included, we reached consensus on 17 scenarios. We reached weak consensus on an additional 19 scenarios by combining two adjacent frequency categories. CONCLUSIONS: A Canadian expert panel of internists has provided frequency recommendations on the utilization of six common laboratory tests in medical inpatients. These recommendations need validation in prospective studies to assess whether restrictive versus liberal laboratory test ordering impacts patient outcomes.