A systematic review on content, structure and process characteristics of interprofessional case discussions (InCaD) involving nurses in adult acute hospital care.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Julien Pöhner, Eva-Maria Regelmann, Kathrin Seibert, Henrikje Stanze
{"title":"A systematic review on content, structure and process characteristics of interprofessional case discussions (InCaD) involving nurses in adult acute hospital care.","authors":"Julien Pöhner, Eva-Maria Regelmann, Kathrin Seibert, Henrikje Stanze","doi":"10.1080/13561820.2025.2562071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This systematic review examines the content, structure, and process characteristics of interprofessional case discussions (InCaD) involving nurses in adult acute hospital care. Given the complexity of patient care and the need for enhanced interprofessional collaboration. Drawing on the structuration model of interprofessional collaboration framework, a comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and PsycINFO (last search: December 2024). Studies with any type of multiprofessional case discussion were included if they described nurse´s tasks and roles. It was conducted a Level of Evidence statement. In total 42 out of 4541 studies were included. Eight types of InCaD were identified, including interprofessional bedside rounds (I(B)Rs), interdisciplinary rounds (IDRs), structured interdisciplinary bedside rounds (SIBR), and multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTM). Central contents of InCaD encompass collaborative decision-making, coordination of care, ethical reflection, and the integration of patient and family perspectives. Nurses play a pivotal role in InCaD, fulfilling tasks related to information exchange, ethical reflection, and coordination of care. However, nurses rarely assume leadership roles within InCaD. Our results reveal considerable heterogeneity in InCaD formats, theoretical foundations, and methodological approaches, no meta-analysis was feasible. While InCaD are seen as a valuable tool to improve care outcomes, further research to establish standardized frameworks and best practices is needed. These findings underscore the need for clear guidelines, nurse-led initiatives, and structured implementation strategies to optimize InCaD in clinical practice. The broad definition used may limit coherence and generalizability, and robust evidence on effectiveness remains scarce. This review provides insights for healthcare leaders, nurse educators by highlighting how the heterogeneity of InCaD formats can be harnessed as a flexible toolkit to develop context-sensitive implementation strategies, strengthen interprofessional collaboration, and ensure patient-centered, team-based care across diverse clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":50174,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interprofessional Care","volume":" ","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interprofessional Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2025.2562071","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This systematic review examines the content, structure, and process characteristics of interprofessional case discussions (InCaD) involving nurses in adult acute hospital care. Given the complexity of patient care and the need for enhanced interprofessional collaboration. Drawing on the structuration model of interprofessional collaboration framework, a comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and PsycINFO (last search: December 2024). Studies with any type of multiprofessional case discussion were included if they described nurse´s tasks and roles. It was conducted a Level of Evidence statement. In total 42 out of 4541 studies were included. Eight types of InCaD were identified, including interprofessional bedside rounds (I(B)Rs), interdisciplinary rounds (IDRs), structured interdisciplinary bedside rounds (SIBR), and multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTM). Central contents of InCaD encompass collaborative decision-making, coordination of care, ethical reflection, and the integration of patient and family perspectives. Nurses play a pivotal role in InCaD, fulfilling tasks related to information exchange, ethical reflection, and coordination of care. However, nurses rarely assume leadership roles within InCaD. Our results reveal considerable heterogeneity in InCaD formats, theoretical foundations, and methodological approaches, no meta-analysis was feasible. While InCaD are seen as a valuable tool to improve care outcomes, further research to establish standardized frameworks and best practices is needed. These findings underscore the need for clear guidelines, nurse-led initiatives, and structured implementation strategies to optimize InCaD in clinical practice. The broad definition used may limit coherence and generalizability, and robust evidence on effectiveness remains scarce. This review provides insights for healthcare leaders, nurse educators by highlighting how the heterogeneity of InCaD formats can be harnessed as a flexible toolkit to develop context-sensitive implementation strategies, strengthen interprofessional collaboration, and ensure patient-centered, team-based care across diverse clinical settings.

成人急症医院护理护士跨专业案例讨论(InCad)内容、结构及过程特征的系统回顾
本系统的回顾检查内容,结构和过程特点的跨专业案例讨论(InCaD)涉及护士在成人急性医院护理。鉴于病人护理的复杂性和加强跨专业合作的需要。借鉴跨专业协作框架的结构模型,在PubMed、CINAHL、Cochrane Library和PsycINFO (last search: December 2024)中进行综合检索。如果研究描述了护士的任务和角色,则包括任何类型的多专业病例讨论。这是一份证据等级声明。总共纳入了4541项研究中的42项。InCaD共有8种类型,包括跨专业床边查房(I(B)Rs)、跨学科床边查房(IDRs)、结构化跨学科床边查房(SIBR)和多学科团队会议(MDTM)。InCaD的核心内容包括协作决策、护理协调、伦理反思以及患者和家庭观点的整合。护士在InCaD中发挥着关键作用,履行着与信息交流、道德反思和护理协调相关的任务。然而,护士很少在InCaD中担任领导角色。我们的研究结果显示,在InCaD格式、理论基础和方法方法上存在相当大的异质性,没有可行的荟萃分析。虽然InCaD被视为改善护理结果的宝贵工具,但需要进一步研究以建立标准化框架和最佳做法。这些发现强调需要明确的指导方针、护士主导的举措和结构化的实施策略来优化InCaD在临床实践中的应用。所使用的广义定义可能会限制一致性和概括性,而且关于有效性的有力证据仍然很少。这篇综述通过强调如何利用InCaD格式的异质性作为灵活的工具包来制定上下文敏感的实施策略,加强跨专业协作,并确保在不同的临床环境中以患者为中心,以团队为基础的护理,为医疗保健领导者和护士教育者提供了见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Interprofessional Care
Journal of Interprofessional Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
14.80%
发文量
124
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Interprofessional Care disseminates research and new developments in the field of interprofessional education and practice. We welcome contributions containing an explicit interprofessional focus, and involving a range of settings, professions, and fields. Areas of practice covered include primary, community and hospital care, health education and public health, and beyond health and social care into fields such as criminal justice and primary/elementary education. Papers introducing additional interprofessional views, for example, from a community development or environmental design perspective, are welcome. The Journal is disseminated internationally and encourages submissions from around the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信