Interprofessional ward rounds in an adult intensive care unit: an appreciative inquiry into the central collaboration between the consultant and the bedside nurse

SIN-BARRSS - Developing a mnemonic to support nurses' participation in interprofessional ward rounds in intensive care: An appreciative inquiry for quality improvement

OBJECTIVES

To develop and pilot a mnemonic to increase the willingness and ability of bedside nurses to contribute to patient reviews in the daily interprofessional ward round.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY/DESIGN

Appreciative inquiry quality improvement study, using ethnographic observations and appreciative inquiry discussions, augmented by quantitative data collection of basic facts.

SETTING

Large (44 beds) critical care unit in the United Kingdom.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Interprofessional development and acceptance of mnemonic; successful preparation for pilot; use and usability of mnemonic; improvements in bedside nurses' contributions to ward round discussions (frequency and focus).

RESULT/FINDINGS

Interprofessional development of a usable and useful mnemonic was successful, pilot implementation showed promising levels of take up and acceptance. Compared to before the quality improvement project bedside nurses were more willing and able to participate in ward round discussions, did so more often, and used the mnemonic script with insight and flexibility.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of a mnemonic supported bedside nurses' contributions to the ward round. This could provide a framework for introducing similar programmes to other intensive care units. Appreciative inquiry methodology could be replicated in other settings to aid the improvement of interprofessional ward rounds, or to address other quality improvement priorities.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

A mnemonic can provide a structure which supports bedside nurses' contributions in ways that make good use of bedside nurses' professional expertise and most up to date knowledge of patients' clinical state. Furthermore, a well-designed mnemonic can be used flexibly and provides an outline script that supports less experienced and less confident nurses to make well-focused and well received contributions to rapid interprofessional discussions. In turn, this can increase these nurses' confidence and capability. More experienced and confident nurses, and ward round leaders, can use the same mnemonic flexibly as an aide memoir that guards against missing information and insights that could affect the quality and safety of patient care.

Nursing experiences in antimicrobial optimisation in the intensive care unit: A convergent analysis of a national survey

BACKGROUND

Recent evidence highlights the need for an interdisciplinary approach to antimicrobial stewardship (AMS). Nursing involvement in optimising antimicrobials in the intensive care unit (ICU) remains understudied.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to explore nurses' perceptions and experiences of antimicrobial optimisation or stewardship in ICUs in Australia.

METHODS

An anonymous web-based survey was deployed nationally in early 2021 through two ICU nursing networks. Associations between survey responses were analysed descriptively and by using nonparametric tests (with statistical significance established at p ≤ 0.05). Free-text survey responses underwent qualitative thematic analysis. Interpretation and reporting of quantitative and qualitative data were integrated.

RESULTS

A total of 226 ICU nurses completed the survey. The majority (197/226; 87%) responded that lack of education limits engagement in AMS. Only 13% (30/226) reported the presence of AMS education and training for nurses in their ICUs. Only about half (108/226; 48%) of the nurses were confident to question prescribers when they considered that the antimicrobial prescribed was unnecessary, with nurses in senior roles more likely to do so than nurses providing bedside care (p < 0.05). Gaps in education (including unfamiliarity with AMS roles), noninclusive antimicrobial discussions, moral distress, and potential workload burden were seen as potential barriers/challenges to engagement.

CONCLUSION

The multifactorial barriers identified that inhibit nurses from performing AMS tasks could be addressed by strengthening interprofessional education at all levels and by applying practical AMS interventions that are inclusive for nursing participation. A purposeful culture change that fosters psychological safety and collaborative practice is paramount to supporting nurses in these roles.

Conducting a good ward round: How do leaders do it?

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Ward rounds (WRs) are complex social processes. Done well, WR discussions and decisions contribute to timely, safe, effective progression of care. However, literature highlights medical dominance; marginalisation or absence of other perspectives, safety risks and suboptimal resource use. This study examined leadership behaviours and what supported good interprofessional WRs, defined as enabling interprofessional collaboration and decision making which progresses patient care in a safe and timely manner. Deepening appreciation of this art should support learning and improvements.

METHOD

Mixed-method appreciative inquiry (AI) into how WRs go well and could go well more often.

CONTEXT

daily interprofessional consultant-led WRs in a large adult critical care unit.

DATA

ethnographic and structured observations (73 h, 348 patient reviews); AI conversations and interviews (71 participants). Inductive iterative analysis shaped by Activity Theory.

PARTICIPANTS

256 qualified healthcare professionals working in the unit.

RESULTS

Leadership of good WRs supported (and minimized contradictions to): making good use of expertise and time, and effective communication. These three key activities required careful and skilled orchestration of contributions to each patient review, which was achieved through four distinct phases (a broadly predictable script), ensuring opportunity to contribute while maintaining focus and a productive pace. This expertise is largely tacit knowledge, learnt informally, which is difficult to analyse and articulate oneself, or explain to others. To make this easier, and thus support learning, we developed the metaphor of a conductor leading musicians.

CONCLUSIONS

Whilst everyone contributes to the joint effort of delivering a good WR, WR leadership is key. It ensures effective use of time and diverse expertise, and coordinates contributions rather like a conductor working with musicians. Although WR needs and approaches vary across contexts, the key leadership activities we identified are likely to transfer to other settings.