MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283266434 · doi:10.29390/cjrt-2021-075

Designing behavioral interventions using the capability-opportunity-motivation-behavior model and the theoretical domains framework to optimize oxygen saturation maintenance by NICU providers

2022· article· en· W4283266434 on OpenAlex
Kevin Middleton, Connie Williams, Deborah Bernard, Kanekal Suresh Gautham, Sandesh Shivananda

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Respiratory Therapy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaHamilton Health SciencesBritish Columbia Centre of Excellence for Women's HealthMcMaster Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoachingNeonatal intensive care unitPsychological interventionMedicineNursingQuality managementDebriefingMultidisciplinary approachPsychologyMedical emergencyMedical educationApplied psychologyOperations managementManagement systemPsychiatryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective Despite evidence-based guidelines, SpO~2~ maintenance-related practices of care providers remain inconsistent. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of interprofessional learning workshops, bedside coaching, and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) level enablers on targeted behavioral change of NICU staff, focusing on SpO~2~ maintenance. Methods NICU is a specialized area of the hospital with sophisticated monitors where multidisciplinary staff provide round-the-clock care for sick and preterm infants. As a subset of a quality improvement project to improve SpO~2~ maintenance and reduce desaturation events, three targeted evidence-based staff behaviors were deemed as important based on established capability-opportunity-motivation-behavior and theoretical domains framework models: setting SpO~2~ alarm limits, using SpO~2~ alarm management algorithms, and reporting daily summaries of SpO~2~ during rounds. We conducted interprofessional workshops, provided bedside coaching, and altered unit NICU processes (guidelines, automated SpO~2~ histogram printouts, defined staff standard work) and measured demonstrable changes in staff reaction, learning, and behaviors by direct observation of behaviors and survey questionnaires. Results Two hundred and seventy-five (87%) and 210 (80%) of NICU staff attended workshops and received bedside coaching, respectively. The proportion of staff expressing satisfaction with workshop and bedside coaching was 85% and 82%, respectively. The proportion of staff reporting improvement in their knowledge and confidence related to SpO~2~ maintenance increased significantly following the workshop. Targeted behaviors related to SpO~2~ maintenance like setting appropriate alarm limits, adhering to SpO~2~ management algorithm, and reporting daily SpO~2~ summaries during rounds increased from 80% to 96%, 0% to 64%, and 20% to 70%, respectively. Conclusion Focused behavioral change interventions aimed at improving staff capability, opportunity, and motivation resulted in a demonstrable change in targeted staff behaviors related to SpO~2~ maintenance. Further research is needed to establish ways of optimizing intended staff behaviors while implementing care bundles in a given setting.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.414
Threshold uncertainty score0.770

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.101
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it