The objective of this study was to determine the impact of family-centered multidisciplinary rounds on an inpatient pediatric ward. We hoped to (1) gain a better understanding of the patient and family experience with family-centered multidisciplinary rounds, (2) measure hospital staff satisfaction with family-centered multidisciplinary rounds compared with conventional rounds, and (3) understand the time commitment for family-centered multidisciplinary rounds and conventional rounds.
A quasi-experimental design was undertaken during a 2-week period. During the first week, the hospital staff conducted conventional rounds. Families were surveyed daily, and the staff were surveyed at the end of the week regarding their experiences. During the second week, newly admitted patients received family-centered multidisciplinary rounds at the bedside. Again, both families and staff were surveyed. Observers recorded the interactions between families and staff and measured the time required to conduct rounds.
A total of 27 patients were admitted during the 2-week study period. No significant differences were found in family satisfaction between conventional rounds and family-centered multidisciplinary rounds. A total of 53 surveys were collected from staff members. The staff reported better understanding of the patients' medical plans, better ability to help the families, and a greater sense of teamwork with family-centered multidisciplinary rounds compared with conventional rounds. It required an additional 2.7 minutes per patient during rounds for family-centered multidisciplinary rounds. With family-centered multidisciplinary rounds, the family affected the medical decision-making discussion in 90% of cases.
Family-centered multidisciplinary rounds is a method of conducting inpatient hospital rounds that fosters teamwork and empowers hospital staff. The patient and family are engaged in and are the focal point of the rounds. Staff members are able to hear everyone's perspective and give input. The impact on staff satisfaction and the family's ability to participate in their care is significant.
"However, the staff reported a better understanding of the patient's plan of care, developed enhanced skills to assist the family, and reported greater sense of collaboration with the healthcare team with familycentered multidisciplinary rounds as opposed to standard rounds. The authors concluded that family-centered multidisciplinary rounds permitted the family to play a key role in the medical decision-making discussion in 90% of the cases (Rosen et al., 2009). "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: In the pediatric critical care setting, change of shift report/handoff does not traditionally occur at the bedside. During report, the nurses share important information that promotes patient safety and continuity of care. The goal of educating the nursing staff about family-centered care and shift report at the bedside is to promote better communication, a more comprehensive handoff, enhanced patient safety, engagement of the patient/family, and increased patient/family and staff satisfaction.
Journal for nurses in professional development 03/2015; 31(2):81-6. DOI:10.1097/NND.0000000000000128
"Physician-patient communication in single-bedded versus four-bedded hospital rooms differed with patients asking more questions and making more remarks in single-bedded rooms and physicians showing more empathic reactions  . Patient-nurse-physician interaction analysis during ward rounds indicated there was a dyad between physician and patient with the nurse having limited inclusion  and family-centered multidisciplinary rounds enhanced staff satisfaction in pediatrics  . "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background: Rounding has long traditions within hospital-based healthcare, as a way to organize the ward-based part of the care and cure process. Despite an increased emphasis on patient participation, there has been limited research exploring physician experiences of actually applying these principles to the ward round.
Aim: To explore physician experiences after changing to a patient-centered and team-based ward round, in an internal medicine department at a Swedish mid-size hospital.
Methods: Qualitative exploratory case-study. Semi-structured interviews with 13 physicians (six consultants, Three residents, four interns) have been carried out. All interviews have been transcribed and analyzed by qualitative method.
Results: The traditional relationship of superiority and subordination, embodied by the patient lying down in bed and the physician standing over the bed, was one essential change in the new ward round. Physicians experienced that less hierarchical relationships with patients, combined with working in a multi-professional team, contributed to better informed clinical decisions, fewer follow-up questions from patients, and increased professional fulfilment. However, physicians also experienced that their autonomy was being reduced, and there was uneasiness about exposing potential knowledge gaps in front of others.
Conclusions: This qualitative study of physician experiences finds that patient-centered and team-based ward rounds is a fertile development journey forward. Also important to notice are the seemingly new and paradoxical findings that despite the introduction of the “right” ward round structure, negative experiences emerged as unwanted side effects to the positive experiences reported. It could be beneficial for leaders in healthcare (both managers and physicians) to consider these results to facilitate future ward round initiatives.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.