Co-development of a transitions in care bundle for patient transitions from the intensive care unit: a mixed-methods analysis of a stakeholder consensus meeting

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorRosgen, Brianna K.
dc.contributor.authorPlotnikoff, Kara M.
dc.contributor.authorKrewulak, Karla D.
dc.contributor.authorShahid, Anmol
dc.contributor.authorHernandez, Laura
dc.contributor.authorSept, Bonnie G.
dc.contributor.authorMorrissey, Jeanna
dc.contributor.authorRobertson, Kristin
dc.contributor.authorFraser, Nancy
dc.contributor.authorNiven, Daniel J.
dc.contributor.authorStraus, Sharon E.
dc.contributor.authorLeigh, Jeanna P.
dc.contributor.authorStelfox, Henry T.
dc.contributor.authorFiest, Kirsten M.
dc.date.accessioned2022-01-09T01:03:26Z
dc.date.available2022-01-09T01:03:26Z
dc.date.issued2022-01-02
dc.date.updated2022-01-09T01:03:25Z
dc.description.abstractAbstract Background Intensive care unit (ICU) patients undergoing transitions in care are at increased risk of adverse events and gaps in medical care. We evaluated existing patient- and family-centered transitions in care tools and identified facilitators, barriers, and implementation considerations for the application of a transitions in care bundle in critically ill adults (i.e., a collection of evidence-based patient- and family-centred tools to improve outcomes during and after transitions from the intensive care unit [ICU] to hospital ward or community). Methods We conducted a concurrent mixed methods (quan + QUAL) study, including stakeholders with experience in ICU transitions in care (i.e., patient/family partners, researchers, decision-makers, providers, and other knowledge-users). First, participants scored existing transitions in care tools using the modified Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation (AGREE-II) framework. Transitions in care tools were discussed by stakeholders and either accepted, accepted with modifications, or rejected if consensus was achieved (≥70% agreement). We summarized quantitative results using frequencies and medians. Second, we conducted a qualitative analysis of participant discussions using grounded theory principles to elicit factors influencing AGREE-II scores, and to identify barriers, facilitators, and implementation considerations for the application of a transitions in care bundle. Results Twenty-nine stakeholders attended. Of 18 transitions in care tools evaluated, seven (39%) tools were accepted with modifications, one (6%) tool was rejected, and consensus was not reached for ten (55%) tools. Qualitative analysis found that participants’ AGREE-II rankings were influenced by: 1) language (e.g., inclusive, balance of jargon and lay language); 2) if the tool was comprehensive (i.e., could stand alone); 3) if the tool could be individualized for each patient; 4) impact to clinical workflow; and 5) how the tool was presented (e.g., brochure, video). Participants discussed implementation considerations for a patient- and family-centered transitions in care bundle: 1) delivery (e.g., tool format and timing); 2) continuity (e.g., follow-up after ICU discharge); and 3) continuous evaluation and improvement (e.g., frequency of tool use). Participants discussed existing facilitators (e.g., collaboration and co-design) and barriers (e.g., health system capacity) that would impact application of a transitions in care bundle. Conclusions Findings will inform future research to develop a transitions in care bundle for transitions from the ICU, co-designed with patients, families, providers, researchers, decision-makers, and knowledge-users.
dc.identifier.citationBMC Health Services Research. 2022 Jan 02;22(1):10
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07392-2
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1880/114263
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/44696
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.rights.holderThe Author(s)
dc.titleCo-development of a transitions in care bundle for patient transitions from the intensive care unit: a mixed-methods analysis of a stakeholder consensus meeting
dc.typeJournal Article
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
12913_2021_Article_7392.pdf
Size:
1.31 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
0 B
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Open Access Publications