Untangling a complex skein on ward round terminologies, purposes, and main features through a rapid review

AIM(S)

To increase conceptual clarity in the field of nursing regarding terms, purposes, and main features of rounding as investigated to date.

DESIGN

A Rapid Review according to the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Protocol.

REVIEW METHODS

These were: (a) set the research question; (b) establish the study eligibility criteria; (c) search the databases; (d) select the studies; (e) extract the data; (f) assess the risk of bias; and (g) provide a synthesis using three methodologies, namely a qualitative content analysis, a thematic and a framework synthesis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE (PubMed), Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health databases and grey literature from 2014 to 2022.

RESULTS

A total of 72 studies were included; 88 different terminologies are used to describe the rounding from one up to five words. "Preparing the care by ensuring an effective care plan, team and environment", "Delivering tailored and timely nursing care" and "Promoting the quality of care" are the three main purposes of the rounding, including several specific aims. Regarding the main features, these emerged from highly structured/prescriptive to low structured/prescriptive approaches to rounding intervention.

CONCLUSION

The word "round" alone seems to be not sufficient to communicate and describe the intervention, suggesting that this field of research is entering within the complex intervention framework. The different aims of the rounding have been conceptually categorized into three main purposes whereas the intervention features may range from simple to very complex, where several options regarding who to involve, how and when to deliver are expressed.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE

This rapid review followed by three data analysis methodologies have resulted in three main frameworks that may be useful to address the research, the clinical practice and the education regarding the terminologies, the different purposes and the main features of the rounding. No Patient or Public Contribution.

NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

There was no patient or public contribution in the conduct of this study.

Patellar Component Design Does Not Impact Clinical Outcomes in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Round or oval implants are used in patellar resurfacing during total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, whether component geometry affects clinical outcomes is unclear. This study aimed to determine if one implant shape conferred superior outcomes to the other.

METHODS

A retrospective review of primary TKA cases performed from 2016 to 2020 was conducted at an urban, tertiary academic center. Four hundred consecutive, primary TKAs were included in these analyses. Cases were included if a surgeon used the round design then oval design for fifty consecutive cases. Baseline demographic data and radiographic measurements were assessed. Surgical data, reasons for revision, and patient-reported outcome measures were analyzed. Independent samples t-test and chi-square tests were used to compare means and proportions. There were no demographic differences between the cohorts.

RESULTS

Postoperative patellar tilt was statistically different between the cohorts. Sixteen patients required revision surgery; however, revision rates did not differ between the cohorts. Of the 9 rounds, 1 button was revised for infection. Of the 7 ovals, 1 button was revised for infection and 1 for loosening. Veterans RAND 12 Physical Component Score at 3 months postoperatively was higher for the round cohort, but no differences were observed at 1 year.

CONCLUSION

While radiographic patellar tilt was significantly different between the cohorts, there was no clinical correlation in outcomes at 3 months or 1 year postoperatively. Longer-term follow-up studies are needed to evaluate the implications of patellar component design on outcomes and function. Nevertheless, the current study affirms that both designs are clinically equivalent which should be used to guide clinical decision-making.

LEVEL III EVIDENCE

Retrospective Cohort.

The Effects of Interdisciplinary Bedside Rounds on Patient Centeredness, Quality of Care, and Team Collaboration: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Research indicates that having multiple healthcare professions and disciplines simultaneously at the patient's bedside improves interprofessional communication and collaboration, coordination of care, and patient-centered shared decision-making. So far, no review has been conducted, which included qualitative studies, explores the feasibility of the method, and looks at differences in definitions.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to explore available evidence on the effects of interdisciplinary bedside rounds (IBRs) on patient centeredness, quality of care and team collaboration; the feasibility of IBRs; and the differences in definitions.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched. The reference lists of included articles and gray literature were also screened. Articles in English, Dutch, and French were included. There were no exclusion criteria for publication age or study design.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

The included (N = 33) articles were critically reviewed and assessed with the Downs and Black checklist. The selection and summarizing of the articles were performed in a 3-step procedure, in which each step was performed by 2 researchers separately with researcher triangulation afterward.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS

Interdisciplinary bedside round has potentially a positive influence on patient centeredness, quality of care, and team collaboration, but because of a substantial variability in definitions, design, outcomes, reporting, and a low quality of evidence, definitive results stay uncertain. Perceived barriers to use IBR are time constraints, lack of shared goals, varied responsibilities of different providers, hierarchy, and coordination challenges. Future research should primarily focus on conceptualizing IBRs, in specific the involvement of patients, before more empiric, multicentered, and longitudinal research is conducted.

A Hierarchical Topology Control Algorithm for WSN, Considering Node Residual Energy and Lightening Cluster Head Burden Based on Affinity Propagation

The low energy adaptive clustering hierarchy (LEACH) is the classical hierarchical topology control algorithm and still widely used today in wireless sensor networks. There are some problems in LEACH such us an unreasonable selection and uneven distribution of cluster heads, not considering the residual energy of nodes, the cluster head is overloaded and there is a high energy consumption of data transmission. In this paper, a topology control algorithm with double cluster heads and multi-hop based on affinity propagation clustering (APDC-M) was proposed. In APDC-M, firstly, a cluster head election algorithm with double choices based on the affinity propagation clustering algorithm (AP) and reference node strategy (APDC) was proposed. APDC is responsible to elect the fusion cluster head for node clustering. Secondly, a forwarding cluster head is elected within each cluster. The forwarding cluster head is responsible for the data transmission in order to reduce the energy consumption of a single cluster head. Lastly, the forwarding cluster heads complete the data transmission from a cluster to the base station by the shortest path inter-cluster multi-hop mode. The comparison simulation results show that APDC-M can make the cluster head election more reasonable and the cluster head distribution more uniform, and effectively reduce the energy consumption of the cluster head nodes when transmitting data, thus prolonging the network life.

Central round block repair of large breast resection defects: oncologic and aesthetic outcomes

Background

The central round block repair is a volume displacement technique to reconstruct large wide local excision (WLE) defects in breasts with moderate ptosis or hypertrophy. There are limited published data on the outcomes of this technique.

Methods

Data were collected prospectively for 57 consecutive patients and follow up information obtained from patient records. The volume of breast resection was estimated geometrically from mammography. Aesthetic outcomes were assessed from clinical measurements and panel review of patient photographs.

Results

The median age was 51 [22-86] years and follow-up 5 (1.9-8.4) years. The median specimen resection weight was 50 [25-361] g and tumour size 25 [10-75] mm. Estimated volume of breast excised was 17.8% (6-31%). In total, 12/57 patients had incomplete margins: five patients had re-excision to achieve clear margins and seven required mastectomy. Two patients had local recurrence during the follow-up period, five developed distant metastases. Aesthetic data were completed for 35/50 patients. Twelve (34%) had no measurable asymmetry and 31 (89%) had a nipple position within 2 cm of the original height. Only two patients requested symmetrising surgery.

Conclusions

Central round block reconstruction of large defects after WLE is a safe technique with good aesthetic outcomes. Contralateral symmetrising surgery is not usually required.