新生儿重症监护室中以家庭为中心的护理干预措施:随机对照试验范围综述,提供干预措施、结果和测量方法菜单。

IF 2 4区 医学 Q2 PEDIATRICS
Ilaria Mariani, Cecilia Laure Juliette Vuillard, Jenny Bua, Martina Girardelli, Marzia Lazzerini
{"title":"新生儿重症监护室中以家庭为中心的护理干预措施:随机对照试验范围综述,提供干预措施、结果和测量方法菜单。","authors":"Ilaria Mariani, Cecilia Laure Juliette Vuillard, Jenny Bua, Martina Girardelli, Marzia Lazzerini","doi":"10.1136/bmjpo-2024-002537","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Benefits of different types of family-centred care (FCC) interventions in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) have been reported. However, a comprehensive review of existing FCC intervention studies was lacking.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This review aimed at synthesising the characteristics of FCC interventions, related outcomes and measurement methods in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in NICU, and providing menus of options to favour implementation and further research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library up to 31 January 2022. Interventions were mapped according to five categories as defined by a previous Cochrane review. We described outcome types, measurement populations, measurement methods and timelines. Subgroup analyses were also performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 6583 studies identified, 146 met eligibility criteria. Overall, 52 (35.6%) RCTs tested more than one category of intervention, with a large variety of combinations, with the most frequent category of intervention being the educational (138 RCTs, 94.5%). We identified a total of 77 different intervention packages, and RCTs comparing the same interventions were lacking. The 146 RCTs reported on 425 different outcomes, classified in 13 major categories with parental mental health (61 RCTs, 41.8% of total RCTs) being the most frequent category in parents, and neurobehavioural/developmental outcomes being the most frequent category in newborns (62 RCTs, 42.5%). For several categories of outcomes almost every RCT used a different measurement method. Educational interventions targeting specifically staff, fathers, siblings and other family members were lacking or poorly described. Only one RCT measured outcomes in health workers, two in siblings and none considered other family members.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A large variety of interventions, outcomes and measurement methods were used in FCC studies in NICU. The derived menus of options should be helpful for researchers and policy makers to identify interventions most suitable in each setting and to further standardise research methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":9069,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Paediatrics Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Family-centred care interventions in neonatal intensive care units: a scoping review of randomised controlled trials providing a menu of interventions, outcomes and measurement methods.\",\"authors\":\"Ilaria Mariani, Cecilia Laure Juliette Vuillard, Jenny Bua, Martina Girardelli, Marzia Lazzerini\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjpo-2024-002537\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Benefits of different types of family-centred care (FCC) interventions in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) have been reported. However, a comprehensive review of existing FCC intervention studies was lacking.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This review aimed at synthesising the characteristics of FCC interventions, related outcomes and measurement methods in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in NICU, and providing menus of options to favour implementation and further research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library up to 31 January 2022. Interventions were mapped according to five categories as defined by a previous Cochrane review. We described outcome types, measurement populations, measurement methods and timelines. Subgroup analyses were also performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 6583 studies identified, 146 met eligibility criteria. Overall, 52 (35.6%) RCTs tested more than one category of intervention, with a large variety of combinations, with the most frequent category of intervention being the educational (138 RCTs, 94.5%). We identified a total of 77 different intervention packages, and RCTs comparing the same interventions were lacking. The 146 RCTs reported on 425 different outcomes, classified in 13 major categories with parental mental health (61 RCTs, 41.8% of total RCTs) being the most frequent category in parents, and neurobehavioural/developmental outcomes being the most frequent category in newborns (62 RCTs, 42.5%). For several categories of outcomes almost every RCT used a different measurement method. Educational interventions targeting specifically staff, fathers, siblings and other family members were lacking or poorly described. Only one RCT measured outcomes in health workers, two in siblings and none considered other family members.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A large variety of interventions, outcomes and measurement methods were used in FCC studies in NICU. The derived menus of options should be helpful for researchers and policy makers to identify interventions most suitable in each setting and to further standardise research methods.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9069,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Paediatrics Open\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Paediatrics Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2024-002537\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Paediatrics Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2024-002537","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:有报道称,新生儿重症监护室(NICU)中不同类型的以家庭为中心的护理(FCC)干预措施均有益处。然而,对现有的以家庭为中心的护理干预研究缺乏全面的综述:本综述旨在综合新生儿重症监护室随机对照试验(RCT)中的 FCC 干预措施、相关结果和测量方法的特点,并提供有利于实施和进一步研究的选项菜单:我们检索了截至 2022 年 1 月 31 日的 PubMed、EMBASE、Web of Science 和 Cochrane 图书馆。根据之前 Cochrane 综述所定义的五个类别对干预措施进行了分类。我们描述了结果类型、测量人群、测量方法和时间表。我们还进行了分组分析:在确定的 6583 项研究中,有 146 项符合资格标准。总体而言,有 52 项(35.6%)研究对一种以上的干预措施进行了测试,其中有多种组合,最常见的干预措施是教育(138 项研究,94.5%)。我们共发现了 77 种不同的一揽子干预措施,但缺乏对相同干预措施进行比较的研究性试验。146 项研究性试验报告了 425 种不同的结果,分为 13 个主要类别,其中父母心理健康(61 项研究性试验,占研究性试验总数的 41.8%)是父母最常报告的类别,神经行为/发育结果是新生儿最常报告的类别(62 项研究性试验,占 42.5%)。对于几类结果,几乎每项研究实验都采用了不同的测量方法。针对工作人员、父亲、兄弟姐妹和其他家庭成员的教育干预措施缺乏或描述不清。只有一项研究对医务人员的治疗效果进行了测量,两项研究对兄弟姐妹的治疗效果进行了测量,没有一项研究考虑到其他家庭成员:结论:在新生儿重症监护室的 FCC 研究中使用了多种干预措施、结果和测量方法。得出的备选方案菜单应有助于研究人员和政策制定者确定最适合各种环境的干预措施,并进一步规范研究方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Family-centred care interventions in neonatal intensive care units: a scoping review of randomised controlled trials providing a menu of interventions, outcomes and measurement methods.

Background: Benefits of different types of family-centred care (FCC) interventions in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) have been reported. However, a comprehensive review of existing FCC intervention studies was lacking.

Objective: This review aimed at synthesising the characteristics of FCC interventions, related outcomes and measurement methods in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in NICU, and providing menus of options to favour implementation and further research.

Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library up to 31 January 2022. Interventions were mapped according to five categories as defined by a previous Cochrane review. We described outcome types, measurement populations, measurement methods and timelines. Subgroup analyses were also performed.

Results: Out of 6583 studies identified, 146 met eligibility criteria. Overall, 52 (35.6%) RCTs tested more than one category of intervention, with a large variety of combinations, with the most frequent category of intervention being the educational (138 RCTs, 94.5%). We identified a total of 77 different intervention packages, and RCTs comparing the same interventions were lacking. The 146 RCTs reported on 425 different outcomes, classified in 13 major categories with parental mental health (61 RCTs, 41.8% of total RCTs) being the most frequent category in parents, and neurobehavioural/developmental outcomes being the most frequent category in newborns (62 RCTs, 42.5%). For several categories of outcomes almost every RCT used a different measurement method. Educational interventions targeting specifically staff, fathers, siblings and other family members were lacking or poorly described. Only one RCT measured outcomes in health workers, two in siblings and none considered other family members.

Conclusions: A large variety of interventions, outcomes and measurement methods were used in FCC studies in NICU. The derived menus of options should be helpful for researchers and policy makers to identify interventions most suitable in each setting and to further standardise research methods.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Paediatrics Open
BMJ Paediatrics Open Medicine-Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
3.80%
发文量
124
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信