Kilgore Rachel V, Langford Rae W
Transplant Surgical ICU, Rapid Response, Memorial Hermann TMC, Fannin 6411, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Crit Care Nurs Clin North Am. 2010 Jun;22(2):271-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2010.03.006. Epub 2010 May 14.
Few studies in the literature have examined the outcomes of health care interdisciplinary teams. Most existing studies have measured attributes of health care teams; however, none have implemented and examined outcomes of a team development intervention. This study was conducted to determine whether a development intervention used with an existing interdisciplinary team would reduce the length of stay for patients in an acute care setting. A quasi-experimental single-subject time series design was conducted with multiple measures of length of stay collected across baseline, intervention, and reversal phases of the study. Bronstein's Model for Interdisciplinary Collaboration provided the framework for this study. The components of this model were used to guide a team development intervention comprised of 4 consecutive weeks of classroom development sessions and 4 consecutive weeks of booster messaging. Length of stay (LOS) data were collected for each of the study phases to examine preintervention LOS and compare these data with LOS during the intervention and reversal phases. The results of this study revealed that the interdisciplinary team development intervention had no positive effect on the length of stay data. Baseline mean LOS across 12 baseline months was 4.83 days (SD=0.65) with monthly means ranging from 4.1 to 6.3 days. The mean LOS was 5.1 and 4.6 days for the intervention months of May and June and 6.0, 6.5, 5.7, and 5.4 days for the reversal months of July to October, respectively. All means in the intervention and reversal phases were higher than comparable months in the baseline phase. The pattern of the graphed trend was closely aligned with the seasonal variations seen during the baseline months. Although these results showed that the team development intervention provided for this interdisciplinary team had no positive effect on the LOS, there are many factors that may have influenced the results and may provide insights useful for future research. LOS may not be the outcome variable that reflects team effectiveness for this population. It is possible that the interdisciplinary team in this study had well-developed collaborative processes before the intervention. Physicians were not included in the team development intervention yet may be the discipline whose participation may have affected LOS.
文献中很少有研究探讨医疗保健跨学科团队的成果。大多数现有研究衡量的是医疗团队的属性;然而,没有一项研究实施并考察过团队发展干预的成果。本研究旨在确定对现有的跨学科团队实施发展干预是否会缩短急性护理环境中患者的住院时间。研究采用了准实验单受试者时间序列设计,在研究的基线、干预和逆转阶段收集了多个住院时间测量值。布朗斯坦跨学科合作模型为本研究提供了框架。该模型的组成部分被用于指导一项团队发展干预,该干预包括连续4周的课堂发展课程和连续4周的强化信息传递。收集了每个研究阶段的住院时间(LOS)数据,以检查干预前的住院时间,并将这些数据与干预和逆转阶段的住院时间进行比较。本研究结果显示,跨学科团队发展干预对住院时间数据没有积极影响。12个基线月的基线平均住院时间为4.83天(标准差=0.65),月均值范围为4.1至6.3天。5月和6月干预月的平均住院时间分别为5.1天和4.6天,7月至10月逆转月的平均住院时间分别为6.0天、6.5天、5.7天和5.4天。干预和逆转阶段的所有均值均高于基线阶段的可比月份。绘制趋势图的模式与基线月份观察到的季节性变化密切一致。尽管这些结果表明为该跨学科团队提供的团队发展干预对住院时间没有积极影响,但有许多因素可能影响了结果,可能为未来研究提供有用的见解。住院时间可能不是反映该人群团队有效性的结果变量。本研究中的跨学科团队在干预前可能已经有了完善的协作流程。团队发展干预中未包括医生,但医生可能是其参与可能影响住院时间的学科。