Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Systematic Reviews
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Care | Protocol

How does feedback shared with interprofessional health care teams shape nursing performance improvement systems? A rapid realist review protocol

Authors: Joachim Rapin, Joanie Pellet, Cedric Mabire, Sylvie Gendron, Carl-Ardy Dubois

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Nursing care quality varies between hospitals, and even between departments within the same institution. Suboptimal care can have deleterious consequences for patients such as lengthened hospital stay, nosocomial infection, pressure ulcers or death. Experts recommend the implementation of nursing performance improvement systems to assess team performance and monitor patient outcomes and efficiency savings. In practice, these systems are expected to include feedback processes directed towards nursing teams and interprofessional staff in order to facilitate adjustments and improve their performance. Unfortunately, feedback appears somewhat haphazard and, at times, overlooked. This could be explained by an ongoing absence of clear recommendations. As a result, feedback effects are inconclusive: some teams improve their practice, others do not. Although feedback has been conceptualised and studied from different theoretical perspectives, ongoing empirical inconsistencies remain unexplained. The goal of this rapid realist review protocol is to develop a theory that explains how feedback shared with interprofessional health care teams shape nursing performance improvement systems.

Method

This study follows standard guidelines established for realist reviews. Mechanisms at work will be analysed using Actor-Network Theory. All scientific documents are selected from five databases, are published in both English and French between 2010 and 2018, and include empirical research, reviews and grey literature. First, selection of documents will proceed on the basis of titles and abstracts; followed by a second selection by reading the remaining full texts. Inclusion criteria and a data extraction form will be pilot tested with 40 articles prior to completion by two reviewers. Data will be summarised in the form of [context, mechanism, outcome] equations to theorise operational feedback.

Discussion

The innovative combination of Actor-Network Theory with a realist methodology holds promise for the identification of explanatory equations in complex systems and theory development. A rapid realist review is relevant to address an enduring knowledge gap which requires theory development. This preliminary study lays the groundwork for a pioneering theory on feedback in nursing performance improvement systems that will subsequently inform a multiple case study.

Systematic review registration

Prospero CRD42018110128
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Aiken LH, Clarke SP, Sloane DM, Sochalski J, Silber JH. Hospital nurse staffing and patient mortality, nurse burnout, and job dissatisfaction. JAMA. 2002;288(16):1987–93.CrossRef
2.
D'Amour D, Dubois CA, Tchouaket E, Clarke S, Blais R. The occurrence of adverse events potentially attributable to nursing care in medical units: cross sectional record review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2014;51(6):882–91.CrossRef
3.
Institute of Medicine. In: Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, editors. To Err is Human: Building a safer health system. Washington (DC): National Academies Press; 2000.
4.
Luk B, Baoyue L, Dietmar A, Emmanuel L, Irina D, Herbert LS, et al. Organization of hospital nursing, provision of nursing care, and patient experiences with care in Europe. Med Care Res Rev. 2015;72(6):643–64.CrossRef
5.
Schwendimann R, Blatter C, Dhaini S, Simon M, Ausserhofer D. The occurrence, types, consequences and preventability of in-hospital adverse events—a scoping review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):521.CrossRef
6.
7.
CPSI. The economics of patient safety in acute care. Edmonton: Technical Report Canadian Patient Safety Institute; 2012.
8.
Tchouaket E, Dubois C-A, D'Amour D. The economic burden of nurse-sensitive adverse events in 22 medical-surgical units: retrospective and matching analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2017;73(7):1696–711.CrossRef
9.
Dubois C-A, D'Amour D, Brault I, Dallaire C, Dery J, Duhoux A, et al. Which priority indicators to use to evaluate nursing care performance? A discussion paper. J Adv Nurs. 2017;73(12):3154–67.CrossRef
10.
11.
Organisation Mondiale de la Santé. The world health report 2000 - Health systems: improving performance. 2000.
12.
Jones TL. Outcome measurement in nursing: imperatives, ideals, history, and challenges. Online J Issues Nurs. 2016;21(2):1–18.PubMed
13.
Doran D, Mildon B, Clarke SP. Vers un bulletin national de la pratique infirmière: synthèse des connaissances. Toronto: NHSRU University of Toronto; 2011.
14.
Dubois C-A, D’Amour D, Pomey MP, Girard F, Brault I. Conceptualizing performance of nursing care as a prerequisite for better measurement: a systematic and interpretive review. BMC Nursing. 2013;12:7.CrossRef
15.
Dussault G, Dubois CA. Human resources for health policies: a critical component in health policies. Hum Resour Health. 2003;1(1):1–16.CrossRef
16.
Rapin J, D’Amour D, Penseyres T, Santos G, Adatte V, Lehn I, et al. Développement d’un système de gestion de la performance des soins dans un centre hospitalier universitaire suisse. Rech Soins Infirm. 2017;131(4):61–70.CrossRef
17.
Contandriopoulos AP, Champagne F, Sainte-Marie G, Thibeault G-C. Conception et évaluation de la performance des organisations et des systèmes de santé. In: Suárez-Herrera JC, Contandriopoulos AP, Cupertino de Barros FP, ZMA H, editors. Améliorer la performance des systèmes de santé: Concepts, méthodes, pratiques. Montréal: Les Presses de l’Université de Montréal; 2017. p. 29–72.
18.
Friedman CP, Rubin JC, Sullivan KJ. Toward an information infrastructure for global health improvement. Yearb Med Inform. 2017;26(1):16–23.CrossRef
19.
Pawson R. The science of evaluation: a realist manifesto. London: Sage; 2013.CrossRef
20.
Richards DA, Hallberg IR. Complex interventions in health: an overview of research methods. Abingdon, Oxon. New York: Routledge; 2015.CrossRef
21.
Bhaskar R. The order of natural necessity: a kind of introduction to critical realism. Garry Hawke: Middletown; 2017.
22.
23.
Bilodeau A, Potvin L. Unpacking complexity in public health interventions with the Actor–Network Theory. Health Promot Int. 2018;33(1):173–81.PubMed
24.
Bilodeau A, Galarneau M, Lefebvre C, Potvin L. Linking process and effects of intersectoral action on local neighbourhoods: systemic modelling based on actor–network theory. Sociol Health Illn. 2018.
25.
Brehaut JC, Colquhoun HL, Eva KW, Carroll K, Sales A, Michie S, et al. Practice feedback interventions: 15 suggestions for optimizing effectiveness. Ann Inter Med. 2016;164(6):435–42.CrossRef
26.
Colquhoun HL, Carroll K, Eva KW, Grimshaw JM, Ivers N, Michie S, et al. Advancing the literature on designing audit and feedback interventions: identifying theory-informed hypotheses. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):1–10.CrossRef
27.
Greenhalgh J, Dalkin S, Gooding K, Gibbons E, Wright J, Meads D, et al. Functionality and feedback: a realist synthesis of the collation, interpretation and utilisation of patient-reported outcome measures data to improve patient care. Health Services and Delivery Research. 5. NIHR Journals Library: Southampton (UK); 2017.
28.
Ivers N, Jamtvedt G, Flottorp S, Young JM, Odgaard-Jensen J, French SD, et al. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;6:CD000259.
29.
Colquhoun H, Michie S, Sales A, Ivers N, Grimshaw JM, Carroll K, et al. Reporting and design elements of audit and feedback interventions: a secondary review. BMJ Qual Safety. 2017;26:54–60.CrossRef
30.
Colquhoun HL, Brehaut JC, Sales A, Ivers N, Grimshaw J, Michie S, et al. A systematic review of the use of theory in randomized controlled trials of audit and feedback. Implement Sci. 2013;8(1):1–88.CrossRef
31.
Pawson R, Greenhalgh T, Harvey G, Walshe K. Realist review—a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10(Suppl 1):21–34.CrossRef
32.
Brehaut JC, Eva KW. Building theories of knowledge translation interventions: Use the entire menu of constructs. Implement Sci. 2012;7(1):1–10.CrossRef
33.
Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Tusler M. Hospital performance reports: impact on quality, market share, and reputation. Health Aff. 2005;24:1150–60.CrossRef
34.
35.
Marchal B, Kegels G, Van Belle S. Theory and realist methods. In: Emmel N, Greenhalgh J, Manzano A, Monaghan M, Dalkin S, editors. Doing Realist Research. London; Thousands Oaks; New Delhi: Sage; 2018. p. 107–19.
36.
Pawson R. Realist methodology: the building blocks of evidence. In: Pawson R, editor. Evidence-based policy: a realist perspective. London: Sage; 2006. p. 17–37.CrossRef
37.
Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: a realist perspective. London: Sage; 2006.CrossRef
38.
Bhaskar R. A realist theory of science. Abingdon, Oxon. New York: Routledge; 2008.
39.
Rycroft-Malone J, McCormack B, Hutchinson AM, DeCorby K, Bucknall TK, Kent B, et al. Realist synthesis: illustrating the method for implementation research. Implement Sci. 2012;7:33.CrossRef
40.
Pawson R, Tilley N. What works in evaluation research? Br J Criminol. 1994;34(3):291–306.CrossRef
41.
42.
AAACN. Scope and standards of practice professional ambulatory care nursing. 8th. ed. Pitman: Author; 2010.
43.
44.
45.
Saul JE, Willis CD, Bitz J, Best A. A time-responsive tool for informing policy making: rapid realist review. Implement Sci. 2013;8(1):1–15.CrossRef
46.
Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):1.CrossRef
47.
Callon M. Éléments pour une sociologie de la traduction: la domestication des coquilles St-Jacques et des marins pêcheurs dans la baie de St. Brieuc. L'Année Sociologique. 1986;26 (numéro spécial La sociologie des Sciences et des Techniques):169-208.
48.
Latour B. La science en action. Paris: La Découverte; 1989.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
Ylikoski P. Social Mechanisms. In: Glennan S, Illari P, editors. The Routledge Handbook of Mechanisms and Mechanical Philosophy. Abingdon; New York: Routledge; 2018. p. 401–12.
54.
Callon M, Latour B. Le grand Léviathan s'apprivoise-t-il? In: Akrich M, Callon M, Latour B, editors. Sociologie de la traduction: Texte fondateurs. Paris: Presses des Mines; 2006. p. 14–35.
55.
Callon M. Techno-economic Networks and Irreversibility. Sociol Rev. 1990;38(1_suppl):132–61.CrossRef
56.
Cooke LJ, Duncan D, Rivera L, Dowling SK, Symonds C, Armson H. The Calgary Audit and Feedback Framework: a practical, evidence-informed approach for the design and implementation of socially constructed learning interventions using audit and group feedback. Implement Sci. 2018;13(1):136.CrossRef
57.
Minary L, Alla F, Cambon L, Kivits J, Potvin L. Addressing complexity in population health intervention research: the context/intervention interface. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2018;72(4):319–23.PubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
How does feedback shared with interprofessional health care teams shape nursing performance improvement systems? A rapid realist review protocol
Authors
Joachim Rapin
Joanie Pellet
Cedric Mabire
Sylvie Gendron
Carl-Ardy Dubois
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
Care
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1097-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Systematic Reviews 1/2019 Go to the issue

Correction

Correction to: Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy of detection of any level of diabetic retinopathy using digital retinal imaging

Protocol

Probiotics for glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: protocol for a systematic review

Protocol

Defining loneliness in older adults: protocol for a systematic review

Protocol

Measurement properties of instruments to assess pain in children and adolescents with cancer: a systematic review protocol

Protocol

The association between diabetes and age at the onset of menopause: a systematic review protocol

Protocol

The effects of exercise on cardiometabolic outcomes in women with polycystic ovary syndrome not taking the oral contraceptive pill: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis