AimTo synthesize the literature on the experiences of patients, families and healthcare professionals with video calls during hospital admission. Second, to investigate facilitators and barriers of implementation of video calls in hospital wards.DesignScoping review.MethodsPubMed, CINAHL and Google Scholar were searched for relevant publications in the period between 2011 and 2023. Publications were selected if they focused on experiences of patients, families or healthcare professionals with video calls between patients and their families; or between families of hospitalized patients and healthcare professionals. Quantitative and qualitative data were summarized in data charting forms.ResultsForty-three studies were included. Patients and families were satisfied with video calls as it facilitated daily communication. Family members felt more engaged and felt they could provide support to their loved ones during admission. Healthcare professionals experienced video calls as an effective way to communicate when in-person visits were not allowed. However, they felt that video calls were emotionally difficult as it was hard to provide support at distance and to use communication skills effectively. Assigning local champions and training of healthcare professionals were identified as facilitators for implementation. Technical issues and increased workload were mentioned as main barriers.ConclusionPatients, families and healthcare professionals consider video calls as a good alternative when in-person visits are not allowed. Healthcare professionals experience more hesitation towards video calls during admission, as it increases perceived workload. In addition, they are uncertain whether video calls are as effective as in-person conservations.Implications for the Clinical PracticeWhen implementing video calls in hospital wards, policymakers and healthcare professionals should select strategies that address the positive aspects of family involvement at distance and the use of digital communication skills.Patient ContributionNo patient or public contribution.
MULTIFILE
Background: Despite evidence supporting the safety of vaginal birth after caesarean section (VBAC), rates are low in many countries. Methods: OptiBIRTH investigated the effects of a woman-centred intervention designed to increase VBAC rates through an unblinded cluster randomised trial in 15 maternity units with VBAC rates < 35% in Germany, Ireland and Italy. Sites were matched in pairs or triplets based on annual birth numbers and VBAC rate, and randomised, 1:1 or 2:1, intervention versus control, following trial registration. The intervention involved evidence-based education of clinicians and women with one previous caesarean section (CS), appointment of opinion leaders, audit/peer review, and joint discussions by women and clinicians. Control sites provided usual care. Primary outcome was annual hospital-level VBAC rates before the trial (2012) versus final year of the trial (2016). Between April 2014 and October 2015, 2002 women were recruited (intervention 1195, control 807), with mode-of-birth data available for 1940 women. Results: The OptiBIRTH intervention was feasible and safe across hospital settings in three countries. There was no statistically significant difference in the change in the proportion of women having a VBAC between intervention sites (25.6% in 2012 to 25.1% in 2016) and control sites (18.3 to 22.3%) (odds ratio adjusted for differences between intervention and control groups (2012) and for homogeneity in VBAC rates at sites in the countries: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.67, 1.14, p = 0.32 based on 5674 women (2012) and 5284 (2016) with outcome data. Among recruited women with birth data, 4/1147 perinatal deaths > 24 weeks gestation occurred in the intervention group (0.34%) and 4/782 in the control group (0.51%), and two uterine ruptures (one per group), a rate of 1:1000. Conclusions: Changing clinical practice takes time. As elective repeat CS is the most common reason for CS in multiparous women, interventions that are feasible and safe and that have been shown to lead to decreasing repeat CS, should be promoted. Continued research to refine the best way of promoting VBAC is essential. This may best be done using an implementation science approach that can modify evidence-based interventions in response to changing clinical circumstances.
At the beginning of the twenty first century obesity entered Dutch maternity care as a ‘new illness’ challenging maternity care professionals in providing optimal care for women with higher BMI’s. International research revealed that obese women had more perinatal problems than normal weight women. However, the effect of higher BMIs on perinatal outcomes had never been studied in women eligible for midwife-led primary care at the outset of their pregnancy. In the context of the Dutch maternity care system, it was not clear if obesity should be treated as a high-risk situation always requiring obstetrician-led care or as a condition that may lead to problems that could be detected in a timely manner in midwife-led care using the usual risk assessment tools. With the increased attention on obesity in maternity care there was also increased interest in GWG. Regarding GWG in the Netherlands, the effect of insufficient or excessive GWG on perinatal outcomes had never been studied and there were no validated guidelines for GWG. A midwife’s care for the individual woman in the context of the Dutch maternity care system - characterised by ‘midwife-led care if possible, obstetrician-led care if needed’ - is hampered by the lack of national multidisciplinary consensus regarding obesity and weight gain. Obesity has not yet been included in the OIL and local protocols contain varying recommendations. To enable sound clinical decisions and to offer optimal individual care for pregnant women in the Netherlands more insights in weight and weight gain in relation to perinatal outcomes are required. With this thesis the author intends to contribute to the body of knowledge on weight and weight gain to enhance optimal midwife-led primary care for the individual woman and to guide midwives’ clinical decision-making.
Het aantal alarmen dat afgaat op een Neonatale Intensive Care Unit (NICU) is hoog omdat de vitale fysiologische parameters van de neonaten als vanzelfsprekend continu gemonitord worden door medische apparatuur. Dit leidt tot een enorme alarmdruk bij NICU-verpleegkundigen, want elk alarm moet beoordeeld worden. Echter, slechts 20% van de klinische alarmen is relevant, wat niet alleen leidt tot inefficiënte werkprocessen, maar ook tot alarmmoeheid en daarmee bedreiging van patiëntveiligheid. Literatuur- en praktijkonderzoek door studenten HBO-ICT en onderzoekers van het lectoraat ICT-innovaties in de Zorg (Hogeschool Windesheim) op de NICU van Isala ziekenhuis in Zwolle laat zien dat er winst lijkt te behalen in het slim combineren van alarmen en het aanpassen van grenswaarden. Hier kan uiteraard niet zomaar mee geëxperimenteerd worden in de werkelijke klinische setting. Isala heeft daarom behoefte aan een testomgeving waarin de impact van alarmaanpassingen op alarmreductie gemeten kan worden zonder dat patiëntveiligheid daarmee in gevaar komt. Een digital twin kan hier een oplossing bieden. Dit is een replica van de fysieke, dynamische NICU-setting waarin data van patiënten, apparaten en hun onderlinge interacties gesimuleerd kunnen worden en artificial intelligence voorspellingen kan doen over de impact van veranderingen. In de gezondheidszorg wordt de potentie van digital twins de laatste twee jaar gezien en het aantal publicaties en best practices neemt toe, maar toepassingen op de intensive care-setting zijn nog dun gezaaid. Dit project, waarvoor Windesheim, Isala en data science agency Little Rocket de krachten bundelen, levert hier een bijdrage aan
