Tracey Bucknall

Realist synthesis: illustrating the method for implementation research

BackgroundRealist synthesis is an increasingly popular approach to the review and synthesis of evidence, which focuses on understanding the mechanisms by which an intervention works (or not). There are few published examples of realist synthesis. This paper therefore fills a gap by describing, in detail, the process used for a realist review and synthesis to answer the question ‘what interventions and strategies are effective in enabling evidence-informed healthcare?’ The strengths and challenges of conducting realist review are also considered.MethodsThe realist approach involves identifying underlying causal mechanisms and exploring how they work under what conditions. The stages of this review included: defining the scope of the review (concept mining and framework formulation); searching for and scrutinising the evidence; extracting and synthesising the evidence; and developing the narrative, including hypotheses.ResultsBased on key terms and concepts related to various interventions to promote evidence-informed healthcare, we developed an outcome-focused theoretical framework. Questions were tailored for each of four theory/intervention areas within the theoretical framework and were used to guide development of a review and data extraction process. The search for literature within our first theory area, change agency, was executed and the screening procedure resulted in inclusion of 52 papers. Using the questions relevant to this theory area, data were extracted by one reviewer and validated by a second reviewer. Synthesis involved organisation of extracted data into evidence tables, theming and formulation of chains of inference, linking between the chains of inference, and hypothesis formulation. The narrative was developed around the hypotheses generated within the change agency theory area.ConclusionsRealist synthesis lends itself to the review of complex interventions because it accounts for context as well as outcomes in the process of systematically and transparently synthesising relevant literature. While realist synthesis demands flexible thinking and the ability to deal with complexity, the rewards include the potential for more pragmatic conclusions than alternative approaches to systematic reviewing. A separate publication will report the findings of the review.

A randomized trial of protocol-directed sedation management for mechanical ventilation in an Australian intensive care unit

Objective:To compare protocol-directed sedation management with traditional non-protocol-directed practice in mechanically ventilated patients. Design:Randomized, controlled trial. Setting:General intensive care unit (24 beds) in an Australian metropolitan teaching hospital. Patients:Adult, mechanically ventilated patients (n = 312). Interventions:Patients were randomly assigned to receive sedation directed by formal guidelines (protocol group, n = 153) or usual local clinical practice (control, n = 159). Measurements and Main Results:The median (95% confidence interval) duration of ventilation was 79 hrs (56–93 hrs) for patients in the protocol group compared with 58 hrs (44–78 hrs) for patients who received control care (p = .20). Lengths of stay (median [range]) in the intensive care unit (94 [2–1106] hrs vs. 88 (14–962) hrs, p = .58) and hospital (13 [1–113] days vs. 13 (1–365) days, p = .97) were similar, as were the proportions of subjects receiving a tracheostomy (17% vs. 15%, p = .64) or undergoing unplanned self-extubation (1.3% vs. 0.6%, p = .61). Death in the intensive care unit occurred in 32 (21%) patients in the protocol group and 32 (20%) control subjects (p = .89), with a similar overall proportion of deaths in hospital (25% vs. 22%, p = .51). A Cox proportional hazards model, after adjustment for age, gender, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, diagnostic category, and doses of commonly used drugs, estimated that protocol sedation management was associated with a 22% decrease (95% confidence interval 40% decrease to 2% increase, p = .07) in the occurrence of successful weaning from mechanical ventilation. Conclusions:This randomized trial provided no evidence of a substantial reduction in the duration of mechanical ventilation or length of stay, in either the intensive care unit or the hospital, with the use of protocol-directed sedation compared with usual local management. Qualified high-intensity nurse staffing and routine Australian intensive care unit nursing responsibility for many aspects of ventilatory practice may explain the contrast between these findings and some recent North American studies.

The role of the medical emergency team in end-of-life care : a multicenter, prospective, observational study

Objective:To investigate the role of medical emergency teams in end-of-life care planning. Design:One month prospective audit of medical emergency team calls. Setting:Seven university-affiliated hospitals in Australia, Canada, and Sweden. Patients:Five hundred eighteen patients who received a medical emergency team call over 1 month. Interventions:None. Measurements and Main Results:There were 652 medical emergency team calls in 518 patients, with multiple calls in 99 (19.1%) patients. There were 161 (31.1%) patients with limitations of medical therapy during the study period. The limitation of medical therapy was instituted in 105 (20.3%) and 56 (10.8%) patients before and after the medical emergency team call, respectively. In 78 patients who died with a limitation of medical therapy in place, the last medical emergency team review was on the day of death in 29.5% of patients, and within 2 days in another 28.2%.Compared with patients who did not have a limitation of medical therapy, those with a limitation of medical therapy were older (80 vs. 66 yrs; p < .001), less likely to be male (44.1% vs. 55.7%; p = .014), more likely to be medical admissions (70.8% vs. 51.3%; p < .001), and less likely to be admitted from home (74.5% vs. 92.2%, p < .001). In addition, those with a limitation of medical therapy were less likely to be discharged home (22.4% vs. 63.6%; p < .001) and more likely to die in hospital (48.4% vs. 12.3%; p < .001). There was a trend for increased likelihood of calls associated with limitations of medical therapy to occur out of hours (51.0% vs. 43.8%, p = .089). Conclusions:Issues around end-of-life care and limitations of medical therapy arose in approximately one-third of calls, suggesting a mismatch between patient needs for end-of-life care and resources at participating hospitals. These calls frequently occur in elderly medical patients and out of hours. Many such patients do not return home, and half die in hospital. There is a need for improved advanced care planning in our hospitals, and to confirm our findings in other organizations.

Pain assessment in critical care: what have we learnt from research

Despite an ongoing acknowledgement in the literature that pain is a significant problem within the critical care environment, this issue has not been adequately addressed by critical care nurses. This paper examines strategies for changing pain management practices in critical care, including reviewing documentation practices, the utilisation of guidelines and algorithms to augment clinical decision making, and increasing educational opportunities available to critical care nurses. It is recommended that pain assessment be given a higher priority within the clinical context, particularly as inadequate pain assessment and management has been linked to increased morbidity and mortality within critical care. Importantly, critical care nurses need to not only be aware of research-based pain management practices, but also lead the way in implementation and continuous evaluation as a measure of decreasing patient pain in the future.

A realist review of interventions and strategies to promote evidence-informed healthcare: A focus on change agency

BackgroundChange agency in its various forms is one intervention aimed at improving the effectiveness of the uptake of evidence. Facilitators, knowledge brokers and opinion leaders are examples of change agency strategies used to promote knowledge utilization. This review adopts a realist approach and addresses the following question: What change agency characteristics work, for whom do they work, in what circumstances and why?MethodsThe literature reviewed spanned the period 1997-2007. Change agency was operationalized as roles that are aimed at effecting successful change in individuals and organizations. A theoretical framework, developed through stakeholder consultation formed the basis for a search for relevant literature. Team members, working in sub groups, independently themed the data and developed chains of inference to form a series of hypotheses regarding change agency and the role of change agency in knowledge use.Results24, 478 electronic references were initially returned from search strategies. Preliminary screening of the article titles reduced the list of potentially relevant papers to 196. A review of full document versions of potentially relevant papers resulted in a final list of 52 papers. The findings add to the knowledge of change agency as they raise issues pertaining to how change agents’ function, how individual change agent characteristics effect evidence-informed health care, the influence of interaction between the change agent and the setting and the overall effect of change agency on knowledge utilization. Particular issues are raised such as how accessibility of the change agent, their cultural compatibility and their attitude mediate overall effectiveness. Findings also indicate the importance of promoting reflection on practice and role modeling. The findings of this study are limited by the complexity and diversity of the change agency literature, poor indexing of literature and a lack of theory-driven approaches.ConclusionThis is the first realist review of change agency. Though effectiveness evidence is weak, change agent roles are evolving, as is the literature, which requires more detailed description of interventions, outcomes measures, the context, intensity, and levels at which interventions are implemented in order to understand how change agent interventions effect evidence-informed health care.

Assessment of Patient Pain in the Postoperative Context

Because of its subjective nature, the assessment of pain requires the use of comprehensive practices that accurately reflect a patient’s experiences of pain. The purpose of this study was to determine how nurses make decisions in their assessment of patients’ pain in the postoperative clinical setting. An observational design was chosen as the means of examining pain activities in two surgical units of a metropolitan teaching hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Six fixed observation times were selected. Each 2-hour observation period was examined 12 times thus resulting in 74 observations. In total, 316 pain activities were determined. Five themes relating to assessment were identified from the data analysis: simple questioning, use of a pain scale, complex assessment, the lack of pain assessment, and physical examination for pain. The study identified how nurses’ prioritization of work demands created barriers in conducting timely and comprehensive pain assessment decisions.

Why we do the things we do: Applying clinical decision-making frameworks to triage practice

This paper discusses major themes presented in the published literature concerning clinical decision making and links these to the practice of emergency department nurse triage. Themes discussed include: approaches to decision research in nursing and medicine; decision autonomy in nursing practice and clinical decision making under conditions of uncertainty. Some assumptions underpinning clinical decision-making frameworks are explored and the use of triage scales, algorithms and intuitive thought processes are discussed in terms of clinical practice. In addition, the strengths and limitations of each approach are outlined. It is argued that naturalistic research methods are necessary in order to describe the often uncertain and frequently chaotic environment in which triage decisions are made. This research must occur in order to evaluate and improve both the triage process and the outcomes of these decisions in practice.

Responding to medical emergencies: system characteristics under examination (RESCUE). A prospective multi-site point prevalence study.

AIM To determine the point-prevalence of patients fulfilling hospital-specific Medical Emergency Team (MET) criteria and their subsequent outcomes. METHOD Inpatients from 10 hospitals with established METs were enrolled for a prospective, point-prevalence study. If MET criteria were present during a set of vital signs, the ward manager was notified. MET activations, unplanned Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admissions, cardiac arrests, Limitations of Medical Treatment (LOMT), hospital discharge and follow-up mortality data were collected. RESULTS Of 1688 patients recruited, 3.26% (n=55) fulfilled MET criteria in a single set of vital signs. None of the 55 received MET review within 30 min of notification, 2 (3.6%) had MET review within the next 24h, none experienced cardiac arrests or unplanned ICU admissions during the follow-up period, and 13 (23.6%) had a LOMT order prior to fulfilling MET criteria. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher for patients fulfilling MET activation criteria (9.1%) compared to those that did not (2.6%; p=0.005, RR=2.95; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.22-7.15), as was mortality at 30 days (RR=2.64; 95% CI 1.37-5.11) and 60 days (RR=1.94; 95% CI 1.11-3.40). The 30 day mortality in patients without an LOMT order was similar to patients without MET criteria (RR=0.94; 95% CI 0.24-3.7). CONCLUSIONS Approximately 1 in 30 hospitalised patients fulfilled MET criteria during data collection. The presence of MET criteria was associated with increased hospital, 30 and 60 day mortality, although much of this increased mortality seemed to be due to issues around end-of-life care. Despite ward manager notification, subsequent MET activation occurred infrequently in these hospitals with established METs. Further research is needed to assess factors that influence staff initiation of a MET call.

Medical error and decision making: Learning from the past and present in intensive care

BACKGROUND Human error occurs in every occupation. Medical errors may result in a near miss or an actual injury to a patient that has nothing to do with the underlying medical condition. Intensive care has one of the highest incidences of medical error and patient injury in any specialty medical area; thought to be related to the rapidly changing patient status and complex diagnoses and treatments. PURPOSE The aims of this paper are to: (1) outline the definition, classifications and aetiology of medical error; (2) summarise key findings from the literature with a specific focus on errors arising from intensive care areas; and (3) conclude with an outline of approaches for analysing clinical information to determine adverse events and inform practice change in intensive care. DATA SOURCE Database searches of articles and textbooks using keywords: medical error, patient safety, decision making and intensive care. Sociology and psychology literature cited therein. FINDINGS Critically ill patients require numerous medications, multiple infusions and procedures. Although medical errors are often detected by clinicians at the bedside, organisational processes and systems may contribute to the problem. A systems approach is thought to provide greater insight into the contributory factors and potential solutions to avoid preventable adverse events. CONCLUSION It is recommended that a variety of clinical information and research techniques are used as a priority to prevent hospital acquired injuries and address patient safety concerns in intensive care.

Collaboration and Co-Production of Knowledge in Healthcare: Opportunities and Challenges

Over time there has been a shift, at least in the rhetoric, from a pipeline conceptualisation of knowledge implementation, to one that recognises the potential of more collaboration, co-productive approaches to knowledge production and use. In this editorial, which is grounded in our research and collective experience, we highlight both the potential and challenge with collaboration and co-production. This includes issues about stakeholder engagement, governance arrangements, and capacity and capability for working in a co-productive way. Finally, we reflect on the fact that this approach is not a panacea, but is accompanied by some philosophical and practical challenges.