Cited by 158Family and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsInterprofessional Education and CollaborationPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Family-centered Multidisciplinary Rounds Enhance the Team Approach in Pediatrics

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of family-centered multidisciplinary rounds on an inpatient pediatric ward. We hoped to (1) gain a better understanding of the patient and family experience with family-centered multidisciplinary rounds, (2) measure hospital staff satisfaction with family-centered multidisciplinary rounds compared with conventional rounds, and (3) understand the time commitment for family-centered multidisciplinary rounds and conventional rounds. METHODS. A quasi-experimental design was undertaken during a 2-week period. During the first week, the hospital staff conducted conventional rounds. Families were surveyed daily, and the staff were surveyed at the end of the week regarding their experiences. During the second week, newly admitted patients received family-centered multidisciplinary rounds at the bedside. Again, both families and staff were surveyed. Observers recorded the interactions between families and staff and measured the time required to conduct rounds. RESULTS. A total of 27 patients were admitted during the 2-week study period. No significant differences were found in family satisfaction between conventional rounds and family-centered multidisciplinary rounds. A total of 53 surveys were collected from staff members. The staff reported better understanding of the patients' medical plans, better ability to help the families, and a greater sense of teamwork with family-centered multidisciplinary rounds compared with conventional rounds. It required an additional 2.7 minutes per patient during rounds for family-centered multidisciplinary rounds. With family-centered multidisciplinary rounds, the family affected the medical decision-making discussion in 90% of cases. CONCLUSIONS. Family-centered multidisciplinary rounds is a method of conducting inpatient hospital rounds that fosters teamwork and empowers hospital staff. The patient and family are engaged in and are the focal point of the rounds. Staff members are able to hear everyone's perspective and give input. The impact on staff satisfaction and the family's ability to participate in their care is significant.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1542/peds.2008-2238

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 19 · Cited by 158

Research works printed but not linked: 18

  1. Holm KE, Patterson J, Gurney JG. Parental involvement and family-centered care in the diagnostic and treatment phases of childhood cancer: results from a qualitative study. J Pediatr Oncol Nurs. 2003;20(6):301–313 · DOI
  2. Rosenbaum P, King S, Law M, King G, Evans J. Family-centered service: a conceptual framework and research review. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 1998;18(1):1–20 · DOI
  3. Woodside JM, Rosenbaum PL, King SM, King GA. Family-centered service: developing and validating a self-assessment tool for pediatric service providers. Child Health Care. 2001;30(3):237–252 · DOI
  4. Institute of Medicine, Committee on Health Care in America. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2001
  5. American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Hospital Care. Family-centered care and the pediatrician's role. Pediatrics. 2003;112(3 pt 1):691–696 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Muething SE, Kotagal UR, Schoettker PJ, Gonzalez del Rey J, DeWitt TG. Family-centered bedside rounds: a new approach to patient care and teaching. Pediatrics. 2007;119(4):829–832 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Johnson BH. Family-centered care: four decades of progress. Fam Syst Health. 2000;18(2):137–156 · DOI
  8. MacKean GL, Thurston WE, Scott CM. Bridging the divide between families and health professionals' perspectives on family-centered care. Health Expectations. 2005;8(1):74–85 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Kizer KW. Patient centered care: essential but probably not sufficient. Qual Saf Health Care. 2002;11(2):117–118 · DOI
  10. Stewart MA. Effective physician-patient communication and health outcomes: a review. CMAJ. 1995;152(9):1423–1433
  11. Ammentorp J, Mainz J, Sabroe S. Parents' priorities and satisfaction with acute pediatric care. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2005;159(2):127–131 · DOI
  12. Co JP, Ferris TG, Marino BL, Homer CJ, Perrin JM. Are hospital characteristics associated with parental views of pediatric inpatient care quality?Pediatrics. 2003;111(2):308–314 · DOI
  13. Lanford A, Clausen R, Mulligan J, Hollenback C, Nelson S, Smith V. Measuring and improving patients' and families' perceptions of care in a system of pediatric hospitals. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 2001;27(8):415–429 · DOI
  14. Homer CJ, Marino B, Cleary PD, et al. Quality of care at a children's hospital: the parents' perspective. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1999;153(11):1123–1129 · DOI
  15. Britto MT, Kotagal UR, Boat TF. Listening to families: first steps toward improved hospital care. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2005;159(2):187–188 · DOI
  16. Uhlig PN, Brown J, Nason AK, Camelio A, Kendall EM. John M. Eisenberg Patient Safety Awards: system innovation—Concord Hospital. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 2002;28(12):666–672 · DOI
  17. Kendall EM. Improving patient care with collaborative rounds. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2003;60(2):132–135 · DOI
  18. Sodomka P, Scott H, Lambert A, Meeks B, Moretz J. A case study: building a patient- and family-centered model of care in an academic medical center; the role of informatics in supporting patient partnerships—a 12-year history and future vision. In: Weaver C, Delaney C, Weber P, Carr R, eds. Nursing and Informatics for the 21st Century: Cases, Practice, and the Future. Chicago, IL: HIMSS Publishing; 2006:501–506

Metadata

Authors
Rosen, P., Stenger, E., Bochkoris, M., Hannon, M. J., & Kwoh, C. K.
Affiliations
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh (US)
Venue
Pediatrics
Published
2009-04-01
Volume
123
Issue
4
Pages
e603-e608
ISSN
  • 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-4275
OpenAlex
W2053438899
Cited by
158
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 13
FWCI
20.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • PEDIATRICS (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Medical Center, University of Pittsburgh
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Family and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Keywords
family-centered care, multidisciplinary rounds, pediatric inpatient care, family involvement in medical decision-making, staff satisfaction, teamwork, family satisfaction
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Female, Hospitals, Pediatric, Hospitals, Teaching, Humans, Male, Medical Staff, Hospital, Patient Care Team, Pediatrics, Pennsylvania, Professional-Family Relations, Models, Organizational

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review