The nurse outcomes and patient outcomes following the High-Quality Care Project

Primary Intensivists and Nurses for Long-Stay Patients: A Survey of Practices and Perceptions at Academic PICUs

OBJECTIVES

To determine the prevalence of the utilization of primary intensivists and primary nurses for long-stay patients in large, academic PICU and ascertain how these practices are operationalized and perceived.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

U.S. PICUs with accredited Pediatric Critical Care Medicine fellowships.

SUBJECTS

One senior physician and one senior nurse at each institution.

INTERVENTION

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Separate but largely analogous questionnaires for intensivists and nurses were created using an iterative process to enhance content/face validity and readability. Sixty-seven intensivists (representing 93% of the 72 institutions with fellowship programs and their PICUs) and 59 nurses (representing 82%) responded. Twenty-four institutions utilize primary intensivists; 30 utilize primary nurses; and 13 utilize both. Most institutions use length of stay and/or other criteria (e.g., medical complexity) for eligibility. Commonly, not all patients that meet eligibility criteria receive primaries. Primary providers are overwhelmingly volunteers, and often only a fraction of providers participate. Primary intensivists at a large majority (>75%) of institutions facilitate information sharing and decision-making, attend family/team meetings, visit patients/families regularly, and are otherwise available upon request. Primary nurses at a similar majority of institutions provide consistent bedside care, facilitate information sharing, and attend family/team meetings. A large majority of respondents thought that primary intensivists increase patient/family satisfaction, reduce their stress, improve provider communication, and reduce conflict, whereas primary nurses similarly increase patient/family satisfaction. More than half of respondents shared that these practices can sometimes require effort (e.g., time and emotion), complicate decision-making, and/or reduce staffing flexibility.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary practices are potential strategies to augment rotating PICU care models and better serve the needs of long-stay and other patients. These practices are being utilized to varying extents and with some operationalization uniformity at large, academic PICUs.

A Focused Review of Long-Stay Patients and the Ethical Imperative to Provide Inpatient Continuity

Long-stay patients are an impactful, vulnerable, growing group of inpatients in today's (and tomorrow's) tertiary hospitals. They can outlast dozens of clinicians that necessarily rotate on and off clinical service. Yet, care from such rotating clinicians can result in fragmented care due to a lack of continuity that insufficiently meets the needs of these patients and their families. Using long-stay PICU patients as an example, this focused review discusses the impact of prolonged admissions and how our fragmented care can compound this impact. It also argues that it is an ethical imperative to provide a level of continuity of care beyond what is considered standard of care and offers a number of strategies that can provide such continuity.

Parent and Provider Perspectives on Primary Continuity Intensivists and Nurses for Long-Stay Pediatric Intensive Care Unit Patients

Rationale: Primary continuity intensivists and nurses for long-stay patients (LSPs) in pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) are understudied strategies used to mitigate the fragmented care of typical rotating care models. Objectives: To investigate the advantages and disadvantages of primary continuity intensivists and nurses for LSPs as perceived by their parents and PICU providers. Methods: We conducted a prospective cross-sectional mixed-methods study of the perspectives of parents whose children were admitted to a PICU for >10 days and had one or more complex chronic conditions regarding the care provided by their PICU intensivists and nurses. As part of a trial, patients had been randomized to care provided by a rotating on-service intensivist who changed weekly and by PICU nurses who changed every 12 hours (usual care group) or to care provided by the same on-service intensivist plus a primary continuity intensivist and primary nurses (primary group). In addition, PICU providers (intensivists, fellows, and nurses) were queried for their perspectives on primary intensivists and nurses. Novel questionnaires, assessed for content and face validity and for readability, were used. The parental questionnaire involved indicating their degree of agreement with 16 statements about their children's care. The provider questionnaire involved rating potential advantages of primary continuity intensivists and nurses and estimating the frequency of disadvantages. Descriptive statistics and divergent stack bar charts were used; parents' and providers' responses were compared, stratified by their children's group (usual care or primary) and provider role, respectively. Results: The parental response rate was 71% (120 completed questionnaires). For 10 of 16 statements, parents whose children had primary continuity intensivists and nurses indicated significantly more positive perceptions of care (e.g., communication, listening, decision making, problems due to changing providers). The provider response rate was 61% (117 completed questionnaires); more than 80% believed that primary intensivists and nurses were highly or very highly beneficial for LSPs. Providers perceived more benefits for patients/families (e.g., informational continuity, facilitating and expediting decision making) than for staff/institutions (e.g., staff satisfaction). Providers reported associated stress, expenditure of time and effort, and decreased staffing flexibility with primary practices. Conclusions: Perceived benefits of primary continuity intensivists and nurses by both parents and providers support more widespread adoption and study of these continuity strategies.

Exploring the relationship between midwives' work environment, women's safety culture, and intent to stay

BACKGROUND

The shortage of midwives is a concern for healthcare systems as it compromises the quality maternity care. Various studies argue that a favorable work environment increases nurses' job satisfaction and intention to continue working at their current workplace.

AIM

To analyze the work environment and its relationship with women's clinical safety culture and midwives' intention to stay in their current job and the midwifery profession.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, correlational study was performed on N = 218 midwives working in Spain. Standardized instruments were used, including The Practice Environment Scale of the Nursing Work Index (PES-NWI) and the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPSC). Descriptive and bivariable statistics were used. The study followed the STROBE guidelines.

RESULTS

The work environment in the labor wards was mixed, according to the PES-NWI classification. The mean total score of the PES-NWI significantly and positively correlated with the mean total score of the HSOPSC (rs = 0.498, p < 0.001), indicating that as the quality of midwives' work environment increased, women's clinical safety increased. Significant correlations were observed between the midwives' intent to stay in the hospital where they work and features of women's safety culture.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study showed significant relationships between the work environment, women's safety culture, and midwives' intentions to leave their job/profession. Creating a favorable working environment could be a potentially effective strategy that encourages improvement in the women's safety culture in healthcare organizations and greater intention of midwives to stay at their current job.

The Primary Nursing Care Model and Inpatients' Nursing-Sensitive Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis of Quantitative Studies

BACKGROUND

The delivery of quality, safe, and patient-centered care is foundational for professional practice. The primary nursing model allows nurses to have excellent knowledge about patients and families and to plan and coordinate care from admission to discharge, with better management of health situations. Nurses play a crucial role in improving patients' outcomes, namely those sensitive to nursing care. The knowledge of the relationship between the primary nursing model and the nursing-sensitive outcomes provides new scientific evidence that strengthens the relevance of this nursing care organization model in the inpatients' health outcomes. This systematic review describes the relationship between nurse-sensitive inpatients' outcomes and the primary nursing care model.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted with a narrative synthesis, and the following databases were searched: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Nursing & Allied Health Collection, SciELO Collections, and Cochrane.

RESULTS

A total of 22 full texts were assessed, of which five were included in the study according to the selection criteria. The analysis results indicated that the primary nursing care model was related to nursing-sensitive patient safety outcomes. Patients' experience was also considered a nursing-sensitive outcome, namely in the satisfaction with nursing care.

CONCLUSION

The negative outcomes are clearly related to the primary nursing care model. There is scarce research that relates primary nursing to positive outcomes, such as patients' functional status and self-care abilities, and more studies are needed.