Laure Perrier

Effectiveness of pre-licensure interprofessional education and post-licensure collaborative interventions

In this paper we scanned and summarized the empirical research evidence and found that the effects of pre-licensure interprofessional education on patient/client care are unknown. In contrast, for post-licensure collaboration interventions, there is a growing body of evidence suggesting positive effects on the delivery of care. The coverage of this latter evidence, however, is patchy, being especially weak in primary care. In interprofessional education, where policy level interventions have been value driven for the last half century, we have identified a base of evidence for the effectiveness of certain post-licensure collaboration interventions; this evidence is lacking for pre-licensure interprofessional education. If interventions and policies for both pre-licensure interprofessional education and post-licensure collaboration are implemented without accompanying rigorous evaluation research, we will remain mired in this same uncertainty into the future.

What is the most appropriate knowledge synthesis method to conduct a review? Protocol for a scoping review

BackgroundA knowledge synthesis attempts to summarize all pertinent studies on a specific question, can improve the understanding of inconsistencies in diverse evidence, and can identify gaps in research evidence to define future research agendas. Knowledge synthesis activities in healthcare have largely focused on systematic reviews of interventions. However, a wider range of synthesis methods has emerged in the last decade addressing different types of questions (e.g., realist synthesis to explore mediating mechanisms and moderators of interventions). Many different knowledge synthesis methods exist in the literature across multiple disciplines, but locating these, particularly for qualitative research, present challenges. There is a need for a comprehensive manual for synthesis methods (quantitative/qualitative or mixed), outlining how these methods are related, and how to match the most appropriate knowledge synthesis method to answer a research question. The objectives of this scoping review are to: 1) conduct a systematic search of the literature for knowledge synthesis methods across multi-disciplinary fields; 2) compare and contrast the different knowledge synthesis methods; and, 3) map out the specific steps to conducting the knowledge syntheses to inform the development of a knowledge synthesis methods manual/tool.MethodsWe will search relevant electronic databases (e.g., MEDLINE, CINAHL), grey literature, and discipline-based listservs. The scoping review will consider all study designs including qualitative and quantitative methodologies (excluding economic analysis or clinical practice guideline development), and identify knowledge synthesis methods across the disciplines of health, education, sociology, and philosophy. Two reviewers will pilot-test the screening criteria and data abstraction forms, and will independently screen the literature and abstract the data. A three-step synthesis process will be used to map the literature to our objectives.DiscussionThis project represents the first attempt to broadly and systematically identify, define and classify knowledge synthesis methods (i.e., less traditional knowledge synthesis methods). We anticipate that our results will lead to an accepted taxonomy for less traditional knowledge synthesis methods, and to the development and implementation of a methods manual for these reviews which will be relevant to a wide range of knowledge users, including researchers, funders, and journal editors.

Transfer of learning and patient outcome in simulated crisis resource management: a systematic review

PurposeSimulation-based learning is increasingly used by healthcare professionals as a safe method to learn and practice non-technical skills, such as communication and leadership, required for effective crisis resource management (CRM). This systematic review was conducted to gain a better understanding of the impact of simulation-based CRM teaching on transfer of learning to the workplace and subsequent changes in patient outcomes.SourceStudies on CRM, crisis management, crew resource management, teamwork, and simulation published up to September 2012 were searched in MEDLINE®, EMBASE™, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ERIC. All studies that used simulation-based CRM teaching with outcomes measured at Kirkpatrick Level 3 (transfer of learning to the workplace) or 4 (patient outcome) were included. Studies measuring only learners’ reactions or simple learning (Kirkpatrick Level 1 or 2, respectively) were excluded. Two authors independently reviewed all identified titles and abstracts for eligibility.Principal findingsNine articles were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. Four studies measured transfer of simulation-based CRM learning into the clinical setting (Kirkpatrick Level 3). In three of these studies, simulation-enhanced CRM training was found significantly more effective than no intervention or didactic teaching. Five studies measured patient outcomes (Kirkpatrick Level 4). Only one of these studies found that simulation-based CRM training made a clearly significant impact on patient mortality.ConclusionsBased on a small number of studies, this systematic review found that CRM skills learned at the simulation centre are transferred to clinical settings, and the acquired CRM skills may translate to improved patient outcomes, including a decrease in mortality.RésuméObjectifL’apprentissage basé sur des simulations est de plus en plus utilisé par les professionnels de santé comme méthodes sécuritaires d’apprentissage et de pratique de compétences non techniques, comme la communication et le leadership, qui sont nécessaires pour une gestion efficace des ressources en situation de crise (CRM). Cette étude systématique a été menée pour mieux comprendre l’impact de l’enseignement à partir de simulations de la CRM sur le transfert des connaissances sur le lieu de travail et les changements ultérieurs sur l’évolution des patients.SourceLes études sur la CRM, gestion de crise, gestion de ressources d’équipes, travail d’équipe et simulation, publiées jusqu’en septembre 2012 ont été recherchées dans les bases de données MEDLINE®, EMBASE™, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials et ERIC. Toutes les études utilisant un enseignement de la CRM à partir de simulations avec des résultats mesurés au niveau 3 de Kirkpatrick (transfert de l’apprentissage au milieu de travail) ou au niveau 4 (évolution du patient) ont été incluses. Toutes les études ne mesurant que les réactions des apprenants ou le seul apprentissage (respectivement, niveau 1 ou 2 de Kirkpatrick) ont été exclues. Deux auteurs ont revu de façon indépendante tous les titres et résumés identifiés pour évaluer leur admissibilité.Constatations principalesNeuf articles répondant aux critères d’inclusion ont été identifiés. Quatre études mesuraient le transfert d’apprentissage de la CRM à partir de simulations vers un cadre clinique (niveau 3 de Kirkpatrick). Dans trois de ces études, la formation à la CRM soutenue par des simulations s’est avérée significativement plus efficace que l’absence d’intervention ou un enseignement didactique. Cinq études mesuraient les résultats pour les patients (niveau 4 de Kirkpatrick). Une seule de ces études a trouvé que la formation à la CRM basée sur des simulations avait un impact clairement significatif sur la mortalité des patients.ConclusionsReposant sur un petit nombre d’études, cette analyse systématique a trouvé que les habiletés en matière de CRM apprises au centre de simulations sont transférées dans des cadres cliniques et que les habiletés acquises de CRM peuvent se traduire par une amélioration de l’évolution, y compris une baisse de la mortalité.

Harassment and discrimination in medical training: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Purpose Harassment and discrimination include a wide range of behaviors that medical trainees perceive as being humiliating, hostile, or abusive. To understand the significance of such mistreatment and to explore potential preventive strategies, the authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the prevalence, risk factors, and sources of harassment and discrimination among medical trainees. Method In 2011, the authors identified relevant studies by searching MEDLINE and EMBASE, scanning reference lists of relevant studies, and contacting experts. They included studies that reported the prevalence, risk factors, and sources of harassment and discrimination among medical trainees. Two reviewers independently screened all articles and abstracted study and participant characteristics and study results. The authors assessed the methodological quality in individual studies using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. They also conducted a meta-analysis. Results The authors included 57 cross-sectional and 2 cohort studies in their review. The meta-analysis of 51 studies demonstrated that 59.4% of medical trainees had experienced at least one form of harassment or discrimination during their training (95% confidence interval [CI]: 52.0%–66.7%). Verbal harassment was the most commonly cited form of harassment (prevalence: 63.0%; 95% CI: 54.8%–71.2%). Consultants were the most commonly cited source of harassment and discrimination, followed by patients or patients’ families (34.4% and 21.9%, respectively). Conclusions This review demonstrates the surprisingly high prevalence of harassment and discrimination among medical trainees that has not declined over time. The authors recommend both drafting policies and promoting cultural change within academic institutions to prevent future abuse.

Association between chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency and multiple sclerosis: a meta-analysis

Background: It has been proposed by Zamboni and colleagues that multiple sclerosis is caused by chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency, a term used to describe ultrasound-detectable abnormalities in the anatomy and flow of intra- and extracerebral veins. We conducted a meta-analysis of studies that reported the frequency of chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency among patients with and those without multiple sclerosis. Methods: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE as well as bibliographies of relevant articles for eligible studies. We included studies if they used ultrasound to diagnose chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency and compared the frequency of the venous abnormalities among patients with and those without multiple sclerosis. Results: We identified eight eligible studies: all included healthy controls, and four of them also included a control group of patients with neurologic diseases other than multiple sclerosis. Chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency was more frequent among patients with multiple sclerosis than among the healthy controls (odds ratio [OR] 13.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.6–71.4), but there was extensive unexplained heterogeneity among the studies. The association remained significant in the most conservative sensitivity analysis (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.2–11.0), in which we removed the initial study by Zamboni and colleagues and added a study that did not find chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency in any patient. Although chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency was also more frequent among patients with multiple sclerosis than among controls with other neurologic diseases (OR 32.5, 95% CI 0.6–1775.7), the association was not statistically significant, the 95% CI was wide, and the OR was less extreme after removal of the study by Zamboni and colleagues (OR 3.5, 95% 0.8–15.8). Interpretation: Our findings showed a positive association between chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency and multiple sclerosis. However, poor reporting of the success of blinding and marked heterogeneity among the studies included in our review precluded definitive conclusions.

Effects of clinical communication interventions in hospitals: a systematic review of information and communication technology adoptions for improved communication between clinicians.

OBJECTIVE To conduct a systematic review of the literature to identify, describe and assess interventions of information and communication technology on the processes of communication and associated patient outcomes within hospital settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS Studies published from the years 1996 to 2010 were considered and were selected if they described an evaluation of information and communication technology interventions to improve clinical communication within hospitals. Two authors abstracted data from full text articles, and the quality of individual articles were appraised. Results of interventions were summarized by their effect. RESULTS There were 18 identified studies that evaluated the use of interventions that included alphanumeric paging, hands-free communication devices, mobile phones, smartphones, task management systems and a display based paging system. Most quantitative studies used a before and after study design and were of lower quality. Of all the studies, there was only one prospective randomized study, but this study used only simulated communication events. Quantitative studies identified improved perceptions of communication and some improvement in communication metrics. Qualitative studies described improvements in efficiency of communication but also issues of loss of control and reliability. CONCLUSIONS Despite the rapid advancement in information and communications technology over the last decade, there is limited evidence suggesting improvements in the ability of health professionals to communicate effectively. Given the critical nature of communication, we advocate further evaluation of information and communication technology designed to improve communication between clinicians. Outcome measures should include measures of patient-oriented outcomes and efficiency for clinicians.

Interventions encouraging the use of systematic reviews by health policymakers and managers: A systematic review

BackgroundSystematic reviews have the potential to inform decisions made by health policymakers and managers, yet little is known about the impact of interventions to increase the use of systematic reviews by these groups in decision making.MethodsWe systematically reviewed the evidence on the impact of interventions for seeking, appraising, and applying evidence from systematic reviews in decision making by health policymakers or managers. Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Methodology Register, Health Technology Assessment Database, and LISA were searched from the earliest date available until April 2010. Two independent reviewers selected studies for inclusion if the intervention intended to increase seeking, appraising, or applying evidence from systematic reviews by a health policymaker or manager. Minimum inclusion criteria were a description of the study population and availability of extractable data.Results11,297 titles and abstracts were reviewed, leading to retrieval of 37 full-text articles for assessment; four of these articles met all inclusion criteria. Three articles described one study where five systematic reviews were mailed to public health officials and followed up with surveys at three months and two years. The articles reported from 23% to 63% of respondents declaring they had used systematic reviews in policymaking decisions. One randomised trial indicated that tailored messages combined with access to a registry of systematic reviews had a significant effect on policies made in the area of healthy body weight promotion in health departments.ConclusionsThe limited empirical data renders the strength of evidence weak for the effectiveness and the types of interventions that encourage health policymakers and managers to use systematic reviews in decision making.

Barriers and facilitators to uptake of systematic reviews by policy makers and health care managers: a scoping review

BackgroundWe completed a scoping review on the barriers and facilitators to use of systematic reviews by health care managers and policy makers, including consideration of format and content, to develop recommendations for systematic review authors and to inform research efforts to develop and test formats for systematic reviews that may optimise their uptake.MethodsWe used the Arksey and O’Malley approach for our scoping review. Electronic databases (e.g., MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo) were searched from inception until September 2014. Any study that identified barriers or facilitators (including format and content features) to uptake of systematic reviews by health care managers and policy makers/analysts was eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers independently screened the literature results and abstracted data from the relevant studies. The identified barriers and facilitators were charted using a barriers and facilitators taxonomy for implementing clinical practice guidelines by clinicians.ResultsWe identified useful information for authors of systematic reviews to inform their preparation of reviews including providing one-page summaries with key messages, tailored to the relevant audience. Moreover, partnerships between researchers and policy makers/managers to facilitate the conduct and use of systematic reviews should be considered to enhance relevance of reviews and thereby influence uptake.ConclusionsSystematic review authors can consider our results when publishing their systematic reviews. These strategies should be rigorously evaluated to determine impact on use of reviews in decision-making.

Impact of crisis resource management simulation-based training for interprofessional and interdisciplinary teams: A systematic review.

Abstract Crisis resource management (CRM) abilities are important for different healthcare providers to effectively manage critical clinical events. This study aims to review the effectiveness of simulation-based CRM training for interprofessional and interdisciplinary teams compared to other instructional methods (e.g., didactics). Interprofessional teams are composed of several professions (e.g., nurse, physician, midwife) while interdisciplinary teams are composed of several disciplines from the same profession (e.g., cardiologist, anaesthesiologist, orthopaedist). Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ERIC were searched using terms related to CRM, crisis management, crew resource management, teamwork, and simulation. Trials comparing simulation-based CRM team training versus any other methods of education were included. The educational interventions involved interprofessional or interdisciplinary healthcare teams. The initial search identified 7456 publications; 12 studies were included. Simulation-based CRM team training was associated with significant improvements in CRM skill acquisition in all but two studies when compared to didactic case-based CRM training or simulation without CRM training. Of the 12 included studies, one showed significant improvements in team behaviours in the workplace, while two studies demonstrated sustained reductions in adverse patient outcomes after a single simulation-based CRM team intervention. In conclusion, CRM simulation-based training for interprofessional and interdisciplinary teams show promise in teaching CRM in the simulator when compared to didactic case-based CRM education or simulation without CRM teaching. More research, however, is required to demonstrate transfer of learning to workplaces and potential impact on patient outcomes.

Exploring mentorship as a strategy to build capacity for knowledge translation research and practice: protocol for a qualitative study.

BackgroundResearch funders, educators, investigators and decision makers worldwide have identified the need to improve the quality of health care by building capacity for knowledge translation (KT) research and practice. Peer-based mentorship represents a vehicle to foster KT capacity. The purpose of this exploratory study is to identify mentoring models that could be used to build KT capacity, consult with putative mentee stakeholders to understand their KT mentorship needs and preferences, and generate recommendations for the content and format of KT mentorship strategies or programs, and how they could be tested through future research.MethodsA conceptual framework was derived based on mentoring goals, processes and outcomes identified in the management and social sciences literature, and our research on barriers and facilitators of academic mentorship. These concepts will inform data collection and analysis. To identify useful models by which to design, implement and evaluate KT mentorship, we will review the social sciences, management, and nursing literature from 1990 to current, browse tables of contents of relevant journals, and scan the references of all eligible studies. Eligibility screening and data extraction will be performed independently by two investigators. Semi-structured interviews will be used to collect information about KT needs, views on mentorship as a knowledge sharing strategy, preferred KT mentoring program elements, and perceived barriers from clinician health services researchers representing different disciplines. Qualitative analysis of transcripts will be performed independently by two investigators, who will meet to compare findings and resolve differences through discussion. Data will be shared and discussed with the research team, and their feedback incorporated into final reports.DiscussionThese findings could be used by universities, research institutes, funding agencies, and professional organizations in Canada and elsewhere to develop, implement, and evaluate mentorship for KT research and practice. This research will establish a theoretical basis upon which we and others can compare the cost-effectiveness of interventions that enhance KT mentorship. If successful, this program of research may increase knowledge about, confidence in, and greater utilization of KT processes, and the quality and quantity of KT research, perhaps ultimately leading to better implementation and adoption of recommended health care services.