BACKGROUND: Family engagement in care for adult inpatients may improve shared decision making in the hospital and the competence and preparedness of informal caregivers to take over the care at home. An important strategy to involve family members in hospital care processes is to include them in (ward) rounds, also called 'family-centered rounds'(FCRs).OBJECTIVES: Summarize the evidence regarding the added value of FCRs from the perspectives of patients, family, and healthcare professionals.METHODS: A review protocol was registered a priori with PROSPERO (number CRD42022320915). The electronic databases PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycInfo were searched for English-written systematic reviews with a focus on FCRs. The results and methods were presented in line with the PRISMA guidelines, and the methodological quality of the included reviews was assessed using the adapted version of the AMSTAR tool.RESULTS: Of the 207 initial records, four systematic reviews were identified covering a total of 67 single studies, mainly performed in critical and pediatric care. Added values of FCR were described at review level, with references to single studies. All four systematic reviews reported an improvement in satisfaction among patients, family, and healthcare professionals, whereby satisfaction is linked to improved communication and interaction, improved situational understanding, inclusion of family in the decision-making process, and improved relationships within the care situation.CONCLUSION: Although only limited research has been conducted on the value of FCRs in the adult non-critical care setting, and despite the existence of a variety of outcome measures, the results available from the pediatric and acute care setting are positive. The findings of the sole study in an adult non-critical patient population are in line with these results. Further research in adult non-critical care is required to verify its effects in this setting.
AIM: To obtain an overview of existing evidence on quality criteria, instruments, and requirements for nursing documentation.DESIGN: Systematic review of systematic reviews.DATA SOURCES: We systematically searched the databases PubMed and CINAHL for the period 2007-April 2017. We also performed additional searches.REVIEW METHODS: Two reviewers independently selected the reviews using a stepwise procedure, assessed the methodological quality of the selected reviews, and extracted the data using a predefined extraction format. We performed descriptive synthesis.RESULTS: Eleven systematic reviews were included. Several quality criteria were described referring to the importance of following the nursing process and using standardized nursing terminologies. In addition, some evidence-based instruments were described for assessing the quality of nursing documentation, such as the D-Catch. Furthermore, several requirements for formats and systems of electronic nursing documentation were found that refer to the importance of user-friendliness and development in consultation with nursing staff.CONCLUSION: Aligning documentation with the nursing process, using standard terminologies, and using user-friendly formats and systems appear to be important for high-quality nursing documentation. The lack of evidence-based quality indicators presents a challenge in the pursuit of high-quality nursing documentation.IMPACT: There is uncertainty in nursing practice about which criteria have to be met to achieve high-quality documentation. Aligning documentation with the nursing process, using standard terminologies, and using user-friendly formats and systems appear to be important. These findings can help nursing staff and care organizations enhance the quality of nursing documentation.
Background: Emergency department utilization has increased tremendously over the past years, which is accompanied by an increased necessity for emergency medicine research to support clinical practice. Important sources of evidence are systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs), but these can only be informative provided their quality is sufficiently high, which can only be assessed if reporting is adequate. The purpose of this study was to assess the quality of reporting of SRs and MAs in emergency medicine using the PRISMA statement. Methods: The top five emergency medicine related journals were selected using the 5-year impact factor of the ISI Web of Knowledge of 2015. All SRs and MAs published in these journals between 2015 and 2016 were extracted and assessed independently by two reviewers on compliance with each item of the PRISMA statement. Results: The included reviews (n = 112) reported a mean of 18 ± 4 items of the PRISMA statement adequately. Reviews mentioning PRISMA adherence did not show better reporting than review without mention of adherence (mean 18.6 (SE 0.4) vs. mean 17.8 (SE 0.5); p = 0.214). Reviews published in journals recommending or requiring adherence to a reporting guideline showed better quality of reporting than journals without such instructions (mean 19.2 (SE 0.4) vs. mean 17.2 (SE 0.5); p = 0.001). Conclusion: There is room for improvement of the quality of reporting of SRs and MAs within the emergency medicine literature. Therefore, authors should use a reporting guideline such as the PRISMA statement. Active journal implementation, by requiring PRISMA endorsement, enhances quality of reporting.
Adaptieve expertise en flexibiliteit zijn belangrijke competenties. Professionals zullen moeten meebewegen met veranderende werkomstandigheden en in staat zijn om die veranderingen vorm te geven. Dit (ontwerp)onderzoek vindt plaats in innovatieve leerwerkomgevingen in bachelor- en masteropleidingen en beschrijft en verklaart de werking van deze innovaties m.b.t. de ontwikkeling van adaptieve expertise.Doel Adaptatwork wil inzicht geven in werkzame mechanismes in en praktische tools ontwerpen voor de ontwikkeling van adaptieve expertise tijdens werkplekleren. Resultaten Wetenschappelijke kennis over de ontwikkeling van adaptieve expertise in hoger onderwijs Praktijkkennis en expertise voor het hoger onderwijs Toepasbare producten voor docenten en stakeholders Looptijd 01 juli 2020 - 31 december 2023 Aanpak Reviews naar adaptieve expertise en mechanismes die dat bevorderen, casestudies, meta-analyse en valorisatie. Wonen 3.0 Het project Wonen 3.0 dient als casus voor dit onderzoek. In deze leerwerkomgeving wordt praktisch onderzoek uitgevoerd op de vraagstukken van de maatschappij rondom het thema wonen in de setting van een modern leerwerkbedrijf. Bedrijven en instellingen, onderzoekers en studenten (als young professionals) ontwikkelen hierin samen nieuwe inzichten en werkende oplossingen. Het onderwijs is gebaseerd op challenge-based learning.
Adaptieve expertise en flexibiliteit zijn belangrijke competenties. Professionals zullen moeten meebewegen met veranderende werkomstandigheden en in staat zijn om die veranderingen vorm te geven. Dit (ontwerp)onderzoek vindt plaats in innovatieve leerwerkomgevingen in bachelor- en masteropleidingen en beschrijft en verklaart de werking van deze innovaties m.b.t. de ontwikkeling van adaptieve expertise.
Physical rehabilitation programs revolve around the repetitive execution of exercises since it has been proven to lead to better rehabilitation results. Although beginning the motor (re)learning process early is paramount to obtain good recovery outcomes, patients do not normally see/experience any short-term improvement, which has a toll on their motivation. Therefore, patients find it difficult to stay engaged in seemingly mundane exercises, not only in terms of adhering to the rehabilitation program, but also in terms of proper execution of the movements. One way in which this motivation problem has been tackled is to employ games in the rehabilitation process. These games are designed to reward patients for performing the exercises correctly or regularly. The rewards can take many forms, for instance providing an experience that is engaging (fun), one that is aesthetically pleasing (appealing visual and aural feedback), or one that employs gamification elements such as points, badges, or achievements. However, even though some of these serious game systems are designed together with physiotherapists and with the patients’ needs in mind, many of them end up not being used consistently during physical rehabilitation past the first few sessions (i.e. novelty effect). Thus, in this project, we aim to 1) Identify, by means of literature reviews, focus groups, and interviews with the involved stakeholders, why this is happening, 2) Develop a set of guidelines for the successful deployment of serious games for rehabilitation, and 3) Develop an initial implementation process and ideas for potential serious games. In a follow-up application, we intend to build on this knowledge and apply it in the design of a (set of) serious game for rehabilitation to be deployed at one of the partners centers and conduct a longitudinal evaluation to measure the success of the application of the deployment guidelines.
