MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313257002 · doi:10.1016/j.aucc.2022.11.007

A realist review of the effective implementation of the ICU Liberation Bundle in the paediatric intensive care unit setting

2022· review· en· W4313257002 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth Dodds, Sapna R. Kudchadkar, Karen Choong, Joseph C. Manning

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Critical Care · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityImpact
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsCINAHLMedicineContext (archaeology)Psychological interventionImplementation researchIntervention (counseling)Intensive care unitMEDLINENursingMedical educationIntensive care medicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to produce an evidence base of what works, for whom, and in what context when implementing the ICU Liberation Bundle into the paediatric intensive care unit (PICU). REVIEW METHOD USED: This is a realist review (a review that considers what works, for whom, and in what context) of contemporary international literature. DATA SOURCES: Data were collected via electronic searches of CINAHL, PubMed, EMBASE and MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Web of Science for articles published before October 2020. REVIEW METHOD: An initial scoping search identified the underpinning theory of the implementation of the ICU Liberation Bundle (a multifactor intervention aimed at improving patient outcomes) which was mapped onto the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We identified 547 unique citations; 12 full-text papers were included that reported eight studies. Data were extracted and mapped to the CFIR domains. RESULTS: Data mapped to all CFIR domains. Characteristics of individuals included involvement of key stakeholders, champions, and parents and understanding of staff attitudes and perceptions of the intervention, and all bedside staff members were involved and given training. Within the inner setting, understanding of unit culture, ensuring effective support systems in place, knowledge of the baseline, and leadership support, and buy-in were important. Culture of family-centred care and alignment of the intervention to national guidelines related to the outer setting. Intervention characteristics included the number and timings of interventions, de-escalation rounding checklists, the use of age-appropriate and validated assessment tools, and local policies for the bundle. The process included set training program, senior unit/hospital team consultation on all processes, continual audit adherence to the bundle and feedback, and celebration of successes. CONCLUSIONS: This novel realist review of the literature identified that successful implementation of the ICU Liberation Bundle into PICU settings involves the following: (i) a thorough understanding of the PICU context, including baseline metrics, resources, and staff attitudes; (ii) using contextual information to adapt the intervention elements to ensure fit; and (iii) both clinical effectiveness and implementation outcomes must be measured. Registration of review: PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020211944.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.729
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.176
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Critical CareSame topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207