RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Aiming for and ensuring effective patient safety is a major priority in the management and culture of every health care organization. The pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) has become a workplace with a high diversity of multidisciplinary physicians and professionals. Therefore, delivery of high-quality care with optimal patient safety in a PICU is dependent on effective interprofessional team management. Nevertheless, ineffective interprofessional teamwork remains ubiquitous. METHODS: We based our review on the framework for interprofessional teamwork recently published in association with the UK Centre for Advancement of Interprofessional Education. Articles were selected to achieve better understanding and to include and translate new ideas and concepts. FINDINGS: The barrier between autonomous nurses and doctors in the PICU within their silos of specialization, the failure of shared mental models, a culture of disrespect, and the lack of empowering parents as team members preclude interprofessional team management and patient safety. A mindset of individual responsibility and accountability embedded in a network of equivalent partners, including the patient and their family members, is required to achieve optimal interprofessional care. Second, working competently as an interprofessional team is a learning process. Working declared as a learning process, psychological safety, and speaking up are pivotal factors to learning in daily practice. Finally, changes in small steps at the level of the microlevel unit are the bases to improve interprofessional team management and patient safety. Once small things with potential impact can be changed in one's own unit, engagement of health care professionals occurs and projects become accepted. CONCLUSION: Bottom-up patient safety initiatives encouraging participation of every single care provider by learning effective interprofessional team management within daily practice may be an effective way of fostering patient safety.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Uncertainty about the presence of infection results in unnecessary and prolonged empiric antibiotic treatment of newborns at risk for early-onset sepsis (EOS). This study evaluates the impact of this uncertainty on the diversity in management. METHODS: A web-based survey with questions addressing management of infection risk-adjusted scenarios was performed in Europe, North America, and Australia. Published national guidelines (n = 5) were reviewed and compared with the results of the survey. RESULTS: 439 Clinicians (68% were neonatologists) from 16 countries completed the survey. In the low-risk scenario, 29% would start antibiotic therapy and 26% would not, both groups without laboratory investigations; 45% would start if laboratory markers were abnormal. In the high-risk scenario, 99% would start antibiotic therapy. In the low-risk scenario, 89% would discontinue antibiotic therapy before 72 hours. In the high-risk scenario, 35% would discontinue therapy before 72 hours, 56% would continue therapy for 5-7 days, and 9% for more than 7 days. Laboratory investigations were used in 31% of scenarios for the decision to start, and in 72% for the decision to discontinue antibiotic treatment. National guidelines differ considerably regarding the decision to start in low-risk and regarding the decision to continue therapy in higher risk situations. CONCLUSIONS: There is a broad diversity of clinical practice in management of EOS and a lack of agreement between current guidelines. The results of the survey reflect the diversity of national guidelines. Prospective studies regarding management of neonates at risk of EOS with safety endpoints are needed.