Evaluation of the impact of an augmented model of The Productive Ward: Releasing Time to Care on staff and patient outcomes: a naturalistic stepped-wedge trial.

BACKGROUND: Improving the quality and efficiency of healthcare is an international priority. A range of complex ward based quality initiatives have been developed over recent years, perhaps the most influential programme has been Productive Ward: Releasing Time to Care. The programme aims to improve work processes and team efficiency with the aim of 'releasing time', which would be used to increase time with patients ultimately improving patient care, although this does not form a specific part of the programme. This study aimed to address this and evaluate the impact using recent methodological advances in complex intervention evaluation design. METHOD: The objective of this study was to assess the impact of an augmented version of The Productive Ward: Releasing Time to Care on staff and patient outcomes. The design was a naturalistic stepped-wedge trial. The setting included fifteen wards in two acute hospitals in a Scottish health board region. The intervention was the Productive Ward: Releasing Time to Care augmented with practice development transformational change methods that focused on staff caring behaviours, teamwork and patient feedback. The primary outcomes included nurses' shared philosophy of care, nurse emotional exhaustion, and patient experience of nurse communication. Secondary outcomes covered additional key dimensions of staff and patient experience and outcomes and frequency of emergency admissions for same diagnosis within 6 months of discharge. RESULTS: We recruited 691 patients, 177 nurses and 14 senior charge nurses. We found statistically significant improvements in two of the study's three primary outcomes: patients' experiences of nurse communication (Effect size=0.15, 95% CI; 0.05 to 0.24), and nurses' shared philosophy of care (Effect size =0.42, 95% CI; 0.14 to 0.70). There were also significant improvements in secondary outcomes: patients' overall rating of ward quality; nurses' positive affect; and items relating to nursing team climate. We found no change in frequency of emergency admissions within six months of discharge. CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence that the augmented version of The Productive Ward: Releasing Time to Care Intervention was successful in improving a number of dimensions of nurse experience and ward culture, in addition to improved patient experience and evaluations of the quality of care received. Despite these positive summary findings across all wards, intervention implementation appeared to vary between wards. By addressing the contextual factors, which may influence these variations, and tailoring some elements of the intervention, it is likely that greater improvements could be achieved. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UKCRN 14195.

Unplanned early hospital readmission among critical care survivors: a mixed methods study of patients and carers.

BACKGROUND: Many intensive care (ICU) survivors experience early unplanned hospital readmission, but the reasons and potential prevention strategies are poorly understood. We aimed to understand contributors to readmissions from the patient/carer perspective. METHODS: This is a mixed methods study with qualitative data taking precedence. Fifty-eight ICU survivors and carers who experienced early unplanned rehospitalisation were interviewed. Thematic analysis was used to identify factors contributing to readmissions, and supplemented with questionnaire data measuring patient comorbidity and carer strain, and importance rating scales for factors that contribute to readmissions in other patient groups. Data were integrated iteratively to identify patterns, which were discussed in five focus groups with different patients/carers who also experienced readmissions. Major patterns and contexts in which unplanned early rehospitalisation occurred in ICU survivors were described. RESULTS: Interviews suggested 10 themes comprising patient-level and system-level issues. Integration with questionnaire data, pattern exploration and discussion at focus groups suggested two major readmission contexts. A 'complex health and psychosocial needs' context occurred in patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy, who frequently also had significant psychological problems, mobility issues, problems with specialist aids/equipment and fragile social support. These patients typically described inadequate preparation for hospital discharge, poor communication between secondary/primary care, and inadequate support with psychological care, medications and goal setting. This complex multidimensional situation contrasted markedly with the alternative 'medically unavoidable' readmission context. In these patients medical issues/complications primarily resulted in hospital readmission, and the other issues were absent or not considered important. CONCLUSIONS: Although some readmissions are medically unavoidable, for many ICU survivors complex health and psychosocial issues contribute concurrently to early rehospitalisation. Care pathways that anticipate and institute anticipatory multifaceted support for these patients merit further development and evaluation.

A family intervention to reduce delirium in hospitalised ICU patients: A feasibility randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Family members could play an important role in preventing and reducing the development of delirium in Intensive Care Units (ICU) patients. This study sought to assess the feasibility of design and recruitment, and acceptability for family members and nurses of a family delivered intervention to reduce delirium in ICU patients. METHOD: A single centre randomised controlled trial in an Australian medical/surgical ICU was conducted. Sixty-one family members were randomised (29 in intervention and 32 in non-intervention group). Following instructions, the intervention comprised the family members providing orientation or memory clues (family photographs, orientation to surroundings) to their relative each day. In addition, family members conducted sensory checks (vision and hearing with glasses and hearing aids); and therapeutic or cognitive stimulation (discussing family life, reminiscing) daily. Eleven ICU nurses were interviewed to gain insight into the feasibility and acceptability of implementing the intervention from their perspective. RESULTS: Recruitment rate was 28% of eligible patients (recruited n=90, attrition n=1). Following instruction by the research nurse the family member delivered the intervention which was assessed to be feasible and acceptable by family members and nurses. Protocol adherence could be improved with alternative data collection methods. Nurses considered the activities acceptable. CONCLUSION: The study was able to recruit, randomise and retain family member participants. Further strategies are required to assess intervention fidelity and improve data collection.

Increased Hospital-Based Physical Rehabilitation and Information Provision After Intensive Care Unit Discharge: The RECOVER Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Critical illness results in disability and reduced health-related quality of life (HRQOL), but the optimum timing and components of rehabilitation are uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of increasing physical and nutritional rehabilitation plus information delivered during the post-intensive care unit (ICU) acute hospital stay by dedicated rehabilitation assistants on subsequent mobility, HRQOL, and prevalent disabilities. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A parallel group, randomized clinical trial with blinded outcome assessment at 2 hospitals in Edinburgh, Scotland, of 240 patients discharged from the ICU between December 1, 2010, and January 31, 2013, who required at least 48 hours of mechanical ventilation. Analysis for the primary outcome and other 3-month outcomes was performed between June and August 2013; for the 6- and 12-month outcomes and the health economic evaluation, between March and April 2014. INTERVENTIONS: During the post-ICU hospital stay, both groups received physiotherapy and dietetic, occupational, and speech/language therapy, but patients in the intervention group received rehabilitation that typically increased the frequency of mobility and exercise therapies 2- to 3-fold, increased dietetic assessment and treatment, used individualized goal setting, and provided greater illness-specific information. Intervention group therapy was coordinated and delivered by a dedicated rehabilitation practitioner. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The Rivermead Mobility Index (RMI) (range 0-15) at 3 months; higher scores indicate greater mobility. Secondary outcomes included HRQOL, psychological outcomes, self-reported symptoms, patient experience, and cost-effectiveness during a 12-month follow-up (completed in February 2014). RESULTS: Median RMI at randomization was 3 (interquartile range [IQR], 1-6) and at 3 months was 13 (IQR, 10-14) for the intervention and usual care groups (mean difference, -0.2 [95% CI, -1.3 to 0.9; P = .71]). The HRQOL scores were unchanged by the intervention (mean difference in the Physical Component Summary score, -0.1 [95% CI, -3.3 to 3.1; P = .96]; and in the Mental Component Summary score, 0.2 [95% CI, -3.4 to 3.8; P = .91]). No differences were found for self-reported symptoms of fatigue, pain, appetite, joint stiffness, or breathlessness. Levels of anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress were similar, as were hand grip strength and the timed Up & Go test. No differences were found at the 6- or 12-month follow-up for any outcome measures. However, patients in the intervention group reported greater satisfaction with physiotherapy, nutritional support, coordination of care, and information provision. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Post-ICU hospital-based rehabilitation, including increased physical and nutritional therapy plus information provision, did not improve physical recovery or HRQOL, but improved patient satisfaction with many aspects of recovery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: isrctn.com Identifier: ISRCTN09412438.

A rehabilitation intervention to promote physical recovery following intensive care: a detailed description of construct development, rationale and content together with proposed taxonomy to capture processes in a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of patients are surviving critical illness, but survival may be associated with a constellation of physical and psychological sequelae that can cause ongoing disability and reduced health-related quality of life. Limited evidence currently exists to guide the optimum structure, timing, and content of rehabilitation programmes. There is a need to both develop and evaluate interventions to support and expedite recovery during the post-ICU discharge period. This paper describes the construct development for a complex rehabilitation intervention intended to promote physical recovery following critical illness. The intervention is currently being evaluated in a randomised trial (ISRCTN09412438; funder Chief Scientists Office, Scotland). METHODS: The intervention was developed using the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework for developing complex healthcare interventions. We ensured representation from a wide variety of stakeholders including content experts from multiple specialties, methodologists, and patient representation. The intervention construct was initially based on literature review, local observational and audit work, qualitative studies with ICU survivors, and brainstorming activities. Iterative refinement was aided by the publication of a National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline (No. 83), publicly available patient stories (Healthtalkonline), a stakeholder event in collaboration with the James Lind Alliance, and local piloting. Modelling and further work involved a feasibility trial and development of a novel generic rehabilitation assistant (GRA) role. Several rounds of external peer review during successive funding applications also contributed to development. RESULTS: The final construct for the complex intervention involved a dedicated GRA trained to pre-defined competencies across multiple rehabilitation domains (physiotherapy, dietetics, occupational therapy, and speech/language therapy), with specific training in post-critical illness issues. The intervention was from ICU discharge to 3 months post-discharge, including inpatient and post-hospital discharge elements. Clear strategies to provide information to patients/families were included. A detailed taxonomy was developed to define and describe the processes undertaken, and capture them during the trial. The detailed process measure description, together with a range of patient, health service, and economic outcomes were successfully mapped on to the modified CONSORT recommendations for reporting non-pharmacologic trial interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The MRC complex intervention framework was an effective guide to developing a novel post-ICU rehabilitation intervention. Combining a clearly defined new healthcare role with a detailed taxonomy of process and activity enabled the intervention to be clearly described for the purpose of trial delivery and reporting. These data will be useful when interpreting the results of the randomised trial, will increase internal and external trial validity, and help others implement the intervention if the intervention proves clinically and cost effective.

Indicators of acute deterioration in adult patients nursed in acute wards: a factorial survey.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of the study was to determine which professional, situational and patient characteristics predict nurses' judgements of patient acuity and likelihood of referral for further review. A secondary aim was to test the feasibility of the factorial survey method in an acute area. BACKGROUND: There is increasing recognition that indicators of deterioration in acutely unwell adults are being missed and referrals delayed. The reasons for this are unclear and require exploration. Assessing nurses' clinical decision-making or judgements in a 'real-world' situation is problematic. DESIGN: The study used a factorial survey design where participants completed randomly generated paper-based vignettes on one occasion. METHODS: The dependent variables were assessment of patient acuity and likelihood of referral. Independent variables consisted of a number of patient characteristics, i.e. heart rate, blood pressure, nurse characteristics, i.e. clinical experience, and situational characteristics i.e. staffing. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Participants were registered nurses working in acute areas excluding intensive care and theatre. Ninety-nine participants responded resulting in 1940 completed vignettes. RESULTS: An early warning score was the single most significant predictor of referral behaviour accounting for 9.6% of the variance. When this was not included in the vignette, nurses used physiological characteristics e.g. respiratory rate, urine output, neurological status. These explained 12% of the variance in the model predicting assessment of patient acuity and 9.4% or the variance predicting likelihood of referral. CONCLUSIONS: When given a series of vignettes, nurses appear to use appropriate physiological parameters to make decisions about patient acuity and need for referral. Our results support the use of early warning scoring systems. Education and professional development should focus more on developing and maximising clinical experience and expertise rather than knowledge acquisition alone. A factorial survey method is feasible to explore decision-making in this area. RELEVANCE TO PRACTICE: This study has several implications for practice. The emergence of an early warning scoring system as a significant individual predictor supports the use of such systems. However, the small amount of explained variance suggests that there are other influences on nurses' assessment of patient acuity and referral decisions that were not measured by the factorial survey approach. Educational provision might focus not just on knowledge acquisition but include educational delivery methods that incorporate or mimic real-ward settings.

Emotional outcome after intensive care: literature review.

AIM: This paper is a report of a literature review to identify (a) the prevalence of emotional and psychological problems after intensive care, (b) associated factors and (c) interventions that might improve this aspect of recovery. BACKGROUND: Being a patient in intensive care has been linked to both short- and long-term emotional and psychological consequences. DATA SOURCES: The literature search was conducted during 2006. Relevant journals and databases were searched, i.e. Medline and CINAHL, between the years 1995 and 2006. REVIEW METHODS: The search terms were 'anxiety', 'depression', posttraumatic stress', 'posttraumatic stress disorder' and 'intensive care'. RESULTS: Fifteen papers were reviewed representing research studies of anxiety, depression and posttraumatic stress, and seven that represented intensive care follow-up clinics and patient diaries. Being in intensive care can result in significant emotional and psychological problems for a number of patients. For the majority of patients, symptoms of distress will decrease over time but for a number these will endure for some years. Current evidence indicates that emotional problems after intensive care are related to both subjective and objective indicators of a patient's intensive care experience. Evidence suggests some benefit in an early rehabilitation programme, daily sedation withdrawal and the use of patient diaries. However, additional research is required to support such findings. CONCLUSION: Our understanding of the consequences of intensive care is improving. Psychological care for intensive care patients has lagged behind care for physical problems. We now need to focus on developing and evaluating appropriate interventions to improve psychological outcome in this patient group.

Partnership working between a higher education institution and NHS TRUSTS: developing an acute and critical care module.

The underpinning philosophy of preparing nurses to work within a modern National Health Service (NHS) is to ensure patient safety and quality of clinical care. There is increasing recognition that post-registration education should become more clinically focused and adopt a more work-based approach. Critical to the success of such an approach is partnership working between education providers and NHS Trusts. Changes in the delivery of acute care in the NHS have resulted in an increased number of highly dependent patients in both critical and non-critical care areas. This article describes a partnership approach between a Higher Education Institution (HEI) and two NHS Trusts to deliver a degree level module to address the subsequent educational implications of these changes. This approach ensured module credibility and clinical focus. Student feedback confirms the clinical relevance of the module. Staff from the NHS had the opportunity to develop teaching skills by preparing teaching materials, delivering teaching sessions and receiving feedback on these. Areas of good practice were identified and there was sharing of skills, knowledge and expertise between both institutions. Joint working can enhance clinical relevance of educational provision and ensure consistency between theory and practice. In addition, there were a number of wider benefits to both institutions that resulted from this initiative.