A scoping review of new implementations of interprofessional bedside rounding models to improve teamwork, care, and outcomes in hospitals

Figures & data

Figure 1. PRISMA Diagram of studies in the selection process.

Table 1. Abbreviated details of each of the included studies in chronological order (1988-June 30, 2020).

First Author (Year) Article Title	Study Design (MMAT Categories) (Quantitative Non-Randomized = QNR)	MMAT Score % Yes (0–100)	Key Characteristics: Non-U.S. Setting; Pediatric Funding sources credited in publication (* if no funding credited)	Types of Outcomes Reported (Team = T; Patient = P; Findings: positive = +; neutral = n; negative = -; uncertain = ?)
Lewis et al. (1988)⸺Patient, parent, and physician perspectives on pediatric oncology rounds	QNR	80	Pediatric; Funding: Institutional	T: + P: +
Wright et al. (1996)⸺The communication gap in the ICU – a possible solution	Not Categorized	N/A	UK*	T: +, n, -
M. P. Young et al. (1998)⸺The impact of a multidisciplinary approach on caring for ventilator-dependent patients	QNR	60	*	T: n P: +, n
Scarsi et al. (2002)⸺Pharmacist participation in medical rounds reduces medication errors	QNR	80	*	T: + P: +
Treacy et al. (2002)⸺Impact of a multidisciplinary team approach upon patency rates of arteriovenous fistulae	QNR	40	Australia*	P: +
Uhlig et al. (2002)⸺System innovation: Concord Hospital	Not Categorized	N/A	*	T: + P: +
Dodek and Raboud (2003)⸺Explicit approach to rounds in an ICU improves communication and satisfaction of providers	QNR	80	Canada*	T: +
Dutton et al. (2003)⸺Daily multidisciplinary rounds shorten length of stay for trauma patients	QNR	80	*	P: +, n
Kucukarslan et al. (2003)⸺Pharmacists on rounding teams reduce preventable adverse drug events in hospital general medicine units	QNR	100	*	P: +
Schiller and Anderson (2003)⸺Family as a member of the trauma rounds: A strategy for maximized communication	Quantitative Descriptive	40	Pediatric (also Adult)*	T: +, n P: +
Fertleman et al. (2005)⸺Improving medication management for patients: the effect of a pharmacist on post-admission ward rounds	QNR	80	UK*	T: + P: +
Monaghan et al. (2005)⸺Improving patient and carer communication, multidisciplinary team working and goal-setting in stroke rehabilitation	QNR	80	UK; Funding: Institutional	T: +
Moroney and Knowles (2006)⸺Innovation and teamwork: introducing multidisciplinary team ward rounds	Not Categorized	N/A	UK*	T: +, - P: +
Bonello et al. (2008)⸺An intensive care unit quality improvement collaborative in nine department of veterans affairs hospitals: reducing ventilator associated pneumonia and catheter-related bloodstream infection rates	QNR	60	Funding: VA Midwest health care network (QI strategic priority)	P: +, n
Latta et al. (2008)⸺Parental responses to involvement in rounds on a pediatric inpatient unit at a teaching hospital: A qualitative study	Qualitative	100	Pediatric*	T: + P: +
Cameron et al. (2009)⸺Parental presence on pediatric intensive care unit rounds	Mixed Methods	80	Pediatric*	T: +, n, - P: +, n, -
Makowsky et al. (2009)⸺Capturing outcomes of clinical activities performed by a rounding pharmacist practicing in team environment	Quantitative Randomized Controlled Trial	80	Canada; Funding:Pharmaceutical, Institutional	P: +, ?
Rosen et al. (2009)⸺Family-centered multidisciplinary rounds enhance the team approach in pediatrics	QNR	60	Pediatric*	T: +
Jacobowski et al. (2010)⸺Communication in critical care: Family rounds in the intensive care unit	QNR	100	Funding: NIH, VA, Foundation, Institutional	T: n P: +, n
Rappaport et al. (2010)⸺Implementing family-centered rounds: pediatric residents’ perceptions	Quantitative Descriptive	80	Pediatric*	T: + P: +
Timmel et al. (2010)⸺Impact of the comprehensive unit-based safety program (CUSP) on safety culture in a surgical inpatient unit	QNR	60	*	T: +
Voos et al. (2011)⸺Effects of implementing family-centered rounds (FCRs) in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU)	QNR	60	Pediatric*	T: + P: +, n
Ladak et al. (2013)⸺Family-centered rounds in Pakistani pediatric intensive care settings: Non-randomized pre- and post- study design	QNR	80	Pakistan; Pediatric; Funding: Institutional	T: +, n, - P: +
Licata et al. (2013)⸺A foundation for patient safety: Phase I implementation of interdisciplinary bedside rounds in the pediatric intensive care unit	QNR	0	Pediatric*	T: +
Roussel et al. (2013)⸺Improving recovery time following heart transplantation: the role of the multidisciplinary health care team	Not Categorized	N/A	*	P: +
Saint et al. (2013)⸺An academic hospitalist model to improve healthcare worker communication and learner education: results from a quasi-experimental study at a Veterans Affairs Medical Center	Mixed Methods	100	Funding: VA	T: + P: +
Oshimura et al. (2014)⸺Family-centered rounding: Can it impact the time of discharge and time of completion of studies at an academic children’s hospital?	QNR	40	Pediatric*	P: +
Palokas et al. (2015)⸺An interactive evaluation of patient/family centered rounds on pediatric inpatient units	Not Categorized	N/A	Pediatric*	T: + P: +
Seigel et al. (2014)⸺Successful implementation of standardized multidisciplinary bedside rounds, including daily goals, in a pediatric ICU	Not Categorized	N/A	Pediatric*	T: +
U. Sharma and Klocke (2014)⸺Attitudes of nursing staff toward interprofessional in-patient-centered rounding	QNR	0	*	T: + P: +
Southwick et al. (2014)⸺Applying athletic principles to medical rounds to improve teaching and patient care	QNR	80	*	T: + P: +, n
Wrobleski et al. (2014)⸺Discharge planning rounds to the bedside: A patient- and family-centered approach	QNR	80	Funding: Institutional	T: + P: +
Berkwitt and Grossman (2015)⸺A qualitative analysis of pediatric patient attitudes regarding family-centered rounds	Qualitative	100	Pediatric*	P: +, n, -
Gausvik et al. (2015)⸺Structured nursing communication on interdisciplinary acute care teams improves perceptions of safety, efficiency, understanding of care plan and teamwork as well as job satisfaction	QNR	60	*	T: +
Shaughnessy and Jackson (2015)⸺Introduction of a new ward round approach in a cardiothoracic critical care unit	Mixed Methods	80	UK*	T: +, n P: n
Stein et al. (2015)⸺Reorganizing a hospital ward as an accountable care unit	Not Categorized	N/A	Funding: HRSA	P: +
Tripathi et al. (2015)⸺Implementation of patient-centered bedside rounds in the pediatric intensive care unit	QNR	40	Pediatric*	T: + P: n
Allen et al. (2017)⸺A novel method of optimizing patient- and family-centered care in the ICU	QNR	40	*	T: + P: +
Braus et al. (2016)⸺Prospective study of a proactive palliative care rounding intervention in a medical ICU	QNR	100	Funding: NIH, Foundation	T: +, n P: +, n
Gustafson et al. (2016)⸺Effect of parent presence during multidisciplinary rounds on NICU-related parental stress	QNR	80	Pediatric*	T: + P: +
Henkin et al. (2016)⸺Improving nurse-physician teamwork through interprofessional bedside rounding	QNR	40	*	T: +
Justice et al. (2016)⸺Improving communication during cardiac ICU multidisciplinary rounds through visual display of patient daily goals	QNR	80	Pediatric; Funding: Pharmaceutical	T: + P: +
Okere et al. (2016)⸺Comparison of a pharmacist-hospitalist collaborative model of inpatient care with multidisciplinary rounds in achieving quality measures	QNR	80	Funding: Foundation	P: +, n
O’Leary et al. (2016)⸺Effect of patient-centered bedside rounds on hospitalized patients’ decision control, activation and satisfaction with care	Quantitative Randomized Controlled Trial	40	Funding: Foundation	T: +, n P: n
Young et al. (2018)⸺Impact of altered medication administration time on interdisciplinary bedside rounds on academic medical ward	QNR	40	*	T: +, n, - P: +
Dunn et al. (2017)⸺The impact of bedside interdisciplinary rounds on length of stay and complications	QNR	80	Funding: Foundation	T: + P: +, n
Hendricks et al. (2017)⸺Facilitators and barriers for interprofessional rounding	Qualitative	100	Funding: HRSA	T: +, n, -
Huang et al. (2017)⸺All together now: Impact of a regionalization and bedside rounding initiative on the efficiency and inclusiveness of clinical rounds	QNR	100	Funding:Pharmaceutical, Institutional	T: +
Huynh et al. (2017)⸺Structured interdisciplinary bedside rounds do not reduce length of hospital stay and 28-day re-admission rate among older people hospitalized with acute illness: an Australian study	QNR	100	Australia*	P: n
Luthy et al. (2017)⸺Bedside or not bedside: Evaluation of patient satisfaction in intensive medical rehabilitation wards	QNR	100	Switzerland*	P: +
McGrath et al. (2017)⸺Evaluating the quality improvement impact of the Global Tracheostomy Collaborative in four diverse NHS hospitals	QNR	60	UK; Funding: Foundation	T: + P: +
Monash et al. (2017)⸺Standardized attending rounds to improve the patient experience: A pragmatic cluster randomized trial	Quantitative Randomized Controlled Trial	100	Funding: NIH	T: + P: +
Thorne et al. (2017)⸺Co-producing interprofessional round work: designing spaces for patient partnership	Qualitative	100	Sweden*	T: +, n, - P: +, n, -
Abu-Rish Blakeney et al. (2018)⸺Purposeful interprofessional team intervention improves relational coordination among advanced heart failure care teams	QNR	80	Funding: HRSA, NIH	T: +
Baik and Zierler (2018)⸺RN job satisfaction and retention after an interprofessional team intervention	QNR	60	Funding: Foundation	T: +
Basic et al. (2018)⸺Structured interdisciplinary bedside rounds, in-hospital deaths, and new nursing home placements among older inpatients	QNR	100	Australia*	P: n, ?
Cao et al. (2018)⸺Patient-centered structured interdisciplinary rounds in the medical ICU	QNR	80	*	T: + P: n
Chow et al. (2018)⸺Structured interdisciplinary bedside rounds in an Australian tertiary hospital emergency department: patient satisfaction and staff perspectives	QNR	40	Australia*	T: +, n, - P: +
Clay-Williams et al. (2018)⸺Improving teamwork and patient outcomes with daily structured interdisciplinary bedside rounds: a multimethod evaluation	Mixed Methods	100	Australia; Funding: Foundation	T: +, n, - P: +, n
Cody et al. (2018)⸺Making a connection: Family experiences with bedside rounds in the intensive care unit	Qualitative	100	*	P: +, n, -
Khan et al. (2018)⸺Patient safety after implementation of a coproduced family centered communication programme: multicenter before and after intervention study	QNR	100	Canada (& U.S.) study sites; Pediatric Funding: PCORI, AHRQ	T: + P: +
Li et al. (2018)⸺Interprofessional Teamwork Innovation Model (ITIM) to promote communication and patient-centered, coordinated care	QNR	60	*	T: + P: +, n
Malec et al. (2018)⸺The care team visit: Approaching interdisciplinary rounds with renewed focus	Not Categorized	N/A	*	T: + P: n, -
Mork et al. (2018)⸺Using Kotter’s Change Framework to implement and sustain multiple complementary ICU initiatives	Not Categorized	N/A	*	T: +
Vega et al. (2018)⸺Quality improvement bedside rounding audits enhance protein provision for pediatric patients receiving continuous renal replacement therapy	QNR	40	Pediatric*	P: +
Wickersham et al. (2018)⸺Novel use of communication technology to improve nurse-physician communication, teamwork, and care coordination during bedside rounds	QNR	60	*	T: +, n
Bekmezian et al. (2019)⸺Keeping time: implementing appointment-based family-centered rounds	QNR	40	*	P: +, –
Gormley et al. (2019)⸺Impact of nurse-led interprofessional rounding on patient experience	Not categorized	N/A	Funding: HRSA	T: +, n
Ha et al. (2019)⸺A multidisciplinary approach to incorporate bedside nurses into antimicrobial stewardship and infection prevention	QNR	40	*	T: +
Lopez et al. (2019)⸺Impacting satisfaction, learning, and efficiency through structured interdisciplinary rounding in a pediatric intensive care unit: A quality improvement project	QNR	60	Funding: Institutional	T: + P: +, n
Opper et al. (2019)⸺Effects of implementing a health team communication redesign on hospital readmissions within 30 days	QNR	20	Funding: Foundation	T: n P: +
Akuamoah-Boateng et al. (2019)⸺RAMPED UP: The development and testing of an interprofessional collaboration model	QNR	80	*	T: + P: +, n
Austin et al. (2020)⸺Evaluation of a nurse practitioner-led project to improve communication and collaboration in the acute care setting	QNR	20	*	T: + P: +
Barcellos and Chatkin (2020)⸺Impact of a multidisciplinary checklist on the duration of invasive mechanical ventilation of length of stay	QNR	80	Brazil*	T: + P: +
Chava et al. (2019)⸺Multidisciplinary rounds in prevention of 30-day readmissions and decreasing length of stay in heart failure patients	QNR	40	*	P: +
Clarke et al. (2020)⸺Antimicrobial stewardship in spinal cord injury: A multidisciplinary approach	QNR	80	Australia*	P: +
Kang et al. (2020)⸺State anxiety, uncertainty in illness, and needs of family members of critically ill patients and their experiences with family-centered multidisciplinary rounds: A mixed methods study	Mixed Methods	60	South Korea; Funding: Foundation	P: +
Redley et al. (2020)⸺Mixed methods quality evaluation of structured interprofessional medical ward rounds	Mixed Methods	0	Australia*	T: +, n, -
Sunkara et al. (2020)⸺Impact of structured interdisciplinary bedside rounding on patient outcomes at a large academic medical center	QNR	80	Funding: HRSA	P: +, n

Abbreviations: MMAT = Mixed Methods Assessment Tool (Harris et al., 2009).

Table 2. Summary of Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) results by study design (n = 79).

Screening Questions (all study types) (n = 79) *If no or can’t tell for screening questions, study not further categorized/evaluated
	Yes	No	Can’t Tell
S1. Are there clear research questions?	69 (87.3%)	8 (10.1%)	2 (2.5%)
S2. Do the collected data allow to address the research questions?	69 (87.3%)	5 (6.3%)	5 (6.3%)
Did not meet MMAT screening criteria n = 10 (12.7%)
Qualitative n = 5 (6.3%)
Methodological quality criteria	Yes	No	Can’t Tell
1.1 Is the qualitative approach appropriate to answer the research question	5 (100%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%
1.2 Are the qualitative data collection methods adequate to address the research question?	5 (100%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%
1.3 Are the findings adequately derived from the data?	5 (100%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%
1.4. Is the interpretation of results sufficiently substantiated by data?	5 (100%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%
1.5. Is there coherence between qualitative data sources, collection, analysis and interpretation?	5 (100%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%
Quantitative randomized controlled trials n = 3 (3.8%)
2.1. Is randomization appropriately performed?	1 (33.3%)	0 (0.0%)	2 (66.7%)
2.2. Are the groups comparable at baseline?	3 (100%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%
2.3. Are there complete outcome data?	3 (100%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%
2.4. Are outcome assessors blinded to the intervention provided?	2 (66.7%)	0 (0.0%)	1 (33.3%)
2.5 Did the participants adhere to the assigned intervention?	2 (66.7%)	0 (0.0%)	1 (33.3%)
Quantitative non-randomized n = 53 (67.1%)
3.1. Are the participants representative of the target population?	45 (84.9%)	2 (3.8%)	6 (11.3%)
3.2. Are measurements appropriate regarding both the outcome and intervention (or exposure)?	47 (88.7%)	2 (3.8%)	4 (7.6%)
3.3. Are there complete outcome data?	39 (73.6%)	13 (24.5%)	1 (1.9%)
3.4. Are the confounders accounted for in the design and analysis?	17 (32.1%)	36 (67.9%)	0 (0%)
3.5. During the study period, is the intervention administered (or exposure occurred) as intended?	25 (47.2%)	1 (1.9%)	27 (50.9%)
Quantitative descriptive n = 2 (2.5%)
4.1. Is the sampling strategy relevant to address the research question?	2 (100.0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)
4.2. Is the sample representative of the target population?	1 (50.0%)	0 (0%)	1 (50.0%)
4.3. Are the measurements appropriate?	1 (50.0%)	1 (50.0%)	0 (0%)
4.4. Is the risk of nonresponse bias low?	2 (100.0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)
4.5. Is the statistical analysis appropriate to answer the research question?	2 (100.0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)
Mixed methods n = 6 (7.6%)
5.1. Is there an adequate rationale for using a mixed methods design to address the research question?	3 (50.0%)	3 (50.0%)	0 (0%)
5.2. Are the different components of the study effectively integrated to answer the research question?	5 (83.3%)	1 (16.7%)	0 (0%)
5.3. Are the outputs of the integration of qualitative and quantitative components adequately interpreted?	5 (83.3%)	1 (16.7%)	0 (0%)
5.4. Are divergences and inconsistencies between quantitative and qualitative results adequately addressed?	4 (66.7%)	1 (16.7%)	1 (16.7%)
5.5. Do the different components of the study adhere to the quality criteria of each tradition of the methods involved?	4 (66.7%)	2 (33.3%)	0 (0%)

Table 3. Team, patient/client, and health-care quality and delivery outcomes reported by included studies following implementation of interprofessional bedside rounds (n = 79).

	Data collected, (n/%)			Positive (desirable change reported) (n/%)		% Positive if collected and reported	Negative (not desirable change reported) (n/%)	Outcome did not change, (n/%)		Mixed results (combination of positive, negative, no change) (n/%)
Team Outcomes
Satisfaction with change	37 (46.8)			29 (36.7)		78.4	0 (0.0)	3 (3.8)		5 (6.3)
Satisfaction with model	28 (35.4)			21 (26.6)		75.0	0 (0.0)	2 (2.5)		5 (6.3)
Rounds constructive use of time	22 (27.9)			16 (20.3)		72.7	1 (1.3)	0 (0.0)		5 (6.3)
Team Communication	34 (43.0)			29 (36.7)		85.2	0 (0.0)	2 (2.5)		3 (3.8)
Team Relationships	20 (25.3)			17(21.5)		85.0	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)		3 (3.8)
Team Perception of Patient Centeredness of Model	23 (29.1)			16 (20.3)		69.6	0 (0.0)	2 (2.5)		5 (6.3)
High Reliability (1 did not report results)	4 (5.1)			3 (3.8)		75.0	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)		0 (0.0)
Retention/ Turnover (2 did not report results)	5 (6.3)			2 (2.5)		40.0	0 (0.0)	1 (1.3)		0 (0.0)
Alignment with Professional Goals	3 (3.8)			1 (1.3)		33.3	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)		2 (2.5)
Workload	11 (13.9)			6 (7.6)		54.5	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)		5 (6.3)
Other (i.e. discussions of goals of care on rounds, number of interruptions, duration of rounds, disciplines present)	18 (22.8)			11 (13.9)		61.1	1 (1.3)	2 (2.5)		4 (5.1)
Patient/Client Outcomes
Patient Experience
Perceptions of Care Received	29 (36.7)			20 (25.3)		69.0	0 (0.0)	4 (5.1)		5 (6.3)
Overall satisfaction with rounds	24 (30.4)			17 (21.5)		70.8	0 (0.0)	5 (6.3)		2(3.8)
Experiences of families joining rounds	20 (25.3)			12 (15.2)		60.0	0 (0.0)	4 (5.1)		4 (5.1)
Maintenance of patient confidentiality	3 (3.8)			3 (3.8)		100.0	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)		0 (0.0)
Clinical Outcomes
Length of Stay		25(31.7)	17 (21.5)		68.0		1 (1.3)		5 (6.3)		2 (2.5)
Readmissions		14 (17.7)	8 (10.1)		57.1		0 (0.0)		5 (6.3)		1 (1.3)
Incidence of Nosocomial Infections		2 (2.5)	2 (2.5)		100.0		0 (0.0)		0 (0.0)		0 (0.0)
Mortality		8 (10.8)	2 (2.5)		25.0		0 (0.0)		6(7.6)		0 (0.0)
Achievement of Clinical Performance Targets		5 (6.3)	5 (6.3)		100.0		0 (0.0)		0 (0.0)		0 (0.0)
Procedural Complications		2 (2.5)	2 (2.5)		100.0		0 (0.0)		0 (0.0)		0 (0.0)
Triggers of Harm or Actual Harm		7 (8.9)	6 (7.6)		85.7		0 (0.0)		0 (0.0)		1 (1.3)^1
Other (i.e., family stress, family knowledge of daily plan, family knows doctor, clinical deterioration, changes in medications, timing of orders /discharges)		18 (22.8)	12 (15.2)		66.7		0 (0.0)		3 (3.8)		3 (3.8)
Health Care Quality and Delivery Outcomes
Safety		17 (21.5)	15 (19.0)		88.2		0.0		1 (1.3)		1 (1.3)
Effectiveness (1 did not report results)		17 (21.5)	13 (16.5)		76.5		0.0		1 (1.3)		2 (2.5)
Patient Centeredness (4 did not report results)		32 (40.5)	19 (24.1)		59.4		1 (1.3)		5 (6.3)		3 (3.8)
Timeliness		19 (24.1)	12 (15.2)		63.2		1 (1.3)		4 (5.1)		2 (2.5)
Efficiency (1 did not report results)		31 (39.2)	21 (26.6)		67.7		1 (1.3)		2 (2.5)		6 (7.6)
Equity		3 (3.8)	0 (0.0)		0.0		0 (0.0)		1 (1.3)		2 (2.5)

Note. Malec et al. (2018) reported zero CAUTIs or CLABSIs during the pre-intervention period but 3 CAUTIs and 1 CLABSI by the time of the 9-month post assessment; they also report desirable changes in utilization rates of central line devices (increased) and Foley catheters (decreased).

Lewis, C., Knopf, D., Chastain-Lorber, K., Ablin, A., Zoger, S., Matthay, K., Glasser, M., & Pantell, R, et al. (1988). Patient, parent, and physician perspectives on pediatric oncology rounds. Journal of Pediatrics, 112(3), 378–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3476(88)80316-0

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Wright, S., Bowkett, J., & Bray, K. (1996). The communication gap in the ICU A possible solution. Nursing in Critical Care, 1(5), 241–244. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9594125/

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Young, M. P., Gooder, V. J., Oltermann, M. H., Bohman, C. B., French, T. K., & James, B. C, et al. (1998). The impact of a multidisciplinary approach on caring for ventilator-dependent patients. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 10(1), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/10.1.15

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Scarsi, K. K., Fotis, M. A., & Noskin, G. A. (2002). Pharmacist participation in medical rounds reduces medication errors. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 59(21), 2089–2092. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/59.21.2089

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Treacy, P. J., Snelling, P., Ragg, J., Carson, P., & O’Rourke, I. (2002). Impact of a multidisciplinary team approach upon patency rates of arteriovenous fistulae. Nephrology, 7(2), 66–71. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1797.2002.00089.x

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Uhlig, P. N., Brown, J., Nason, A. K., Camelio, A., & Kendall, E. (2002). John M. Eisenberg patient safety awards. System innovation: concord hospital. Joint Commission Journal on Quality Improvement, 28(12), 666–672. DOI: 10.1016/s1070-3241(02)28072-4

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Dodek, P. M., & Raboud, J. (2003). Explicit approach to rounds in an ICU improves communication and satisfaction of providers. Intensive Care Medicine, 29(9), 1584–1588. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-003-1815-y

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Dutton, R. P., Cooper, C., Jones, A., Leone, S., Kramer, M. E., & Scalea, T. M, et al. (2003). Daily multidisciplinary rounds shorten length of stay for trauma patients. Journal of Trauma, 55(5), 913–919. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.TA.0000093395.34097.56

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Kucukarslan, S. N., Peters, M., Mlynarek, M., & Nafziger, D. A. (2003). Pharmacists on rounding teams reduce preventable adverse drug events in hospital general medicine units. Archives of Internal Medicine, 163(17), 2014–2018. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.163.17.2014

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Schiller, W. R., & Anderson, B. F. (2003). Family as a member of the trauma rounds: A strategy for maximized communication. Journal of Trauma Nursing, 10(4), 93–101. https://doi.org/10.1097/00043860-200310040-00001

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Fertleman, M., Barnett, N., & Patel, T. (2005). Improving medication management for patients: the effect of a pharmacist on post-admission ward rounds. Quality & Safety in Health Care, 14(3), 207–211. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2004.011759

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Monaghan, J., Channell, K., McDowell, D., & Sharma, A. K. (2005). Improving patient and career communication, multidisciplinary team working and goal-setting in stroke rehabilitation. Clinical Rehabilitation, 19(2), 194–199. https://doi.org/10.1191/0269215505cr837oa

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Moroney, N., & Knowles, C. (2006). Innovation and teamwork: introducing multidisciplinary team ward rounds. Nursing Management (Harrow, London, England: 1994), 13(1), 28–31. https://doi.org/10.7748/nm2006.04.13.1.28.c2047

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Bonello, R. S., Fletcher, C. E., Becker, W. K., Clutter, K. L., Arjes, S. L., Cook, J. J., & Petzel, R. A, et al. (2008). An intensive care unit quality improvement collaborative in nine department of veterans affairs hospitals: reducing ventilator-associated pneumonia and catheter-related bloodstream infection rates. Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, 34(11), 639–645. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1553-7250(08)34081-1

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Latta, L. C., Dick, R., Parry, C., & Tamura, G. S. (2008). Parental responses to involvement in rounds on a pediatric inpatient unit at a teaching hospital: A qualitative study. Academic Medicine, 83(3), 292–297. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181637e21

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Cameron, M. A., Schleien, C. L., & Morris, M. C. (2009). Parental presence on pediatric intensive care unit rounds. Journal of Pediatrics, 155(4), 522–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2009.03.035

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Makowsky, M. J., Koshman, S. L., Midodzi, W. K., & Tsuyuki, R. T. (2009). Capturing outcomes of clinical activities performed by a rounding pharmacist practicing in a team environment: the COLLABORATE study [NCT00351676]. Medical Care, 47(6), 642–650. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181926032

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Rosen, P., Stenger, E., Bochkoris, M., Hannon, M. J., & Kwoh, C. K. (2009). Family-centered multidisciplinary rounds enhance the team approach in pediatrics. Pediatrics, 123(4), e603–8. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2008-2238

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Jacobowski, N. L., Girard, T. D., Mulder, J. A., & Ely, E. W. (2010). Communication in critical care: family rounds in the intensive care unit. American Journal of Critical Care, 19(5), 421–430. https://doi.org/10.4037/ajcc2010656

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Rappaport, D. I., Cellucci, M. F., & Leffler, M. G. (2010). Implementing family-centered rounds: pediatric residents’ perceptions. Clinical Pediatrics, 49(3), 228–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/0009922809346568

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Timmel, J., Kent, P. S., Holzmueller, C. G., Paine, L., Schulick, R. D., & Pronovost, P. J, et al. (2010). Impact of the comprehensive unit-based safety program (CUSP) on safety culture in a surgical inpatient unit. Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, 36(6), 252–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1553-7250(10)36040-5

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Voos, K. C., Ross, G., Ward, M. J., Yohay, A. L., Osorio, S. N., & Perlman, J. M, et al. (2011). Effects of implementing family-centered rounds (FCRs) in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine, 24(11), 1403–1406. https://doi.org/10.3109/14767058.2011.596960

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ladak, L. A., Premji, S. S., Amanullah, M. M., Haque, A., Ajani, K., & Siddiqui, F. J, et al. (2012). Family-centered rounds in Pakistani pediatric intensive care settings: Non-randomized pre- and post-study design. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 50(6), 717–726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.05.009

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Licata, J., Aneja, R. K., Kyper, C., Spencer, T., Tharp, M., Scott, M., & Pasek, T. A, et al. (2013). A foundation for patient safety: phase I implementation of interdisciplinary bedside rounds in the pediatric intensive care unit. Critical Care Nurse, 33(3), 89–91. https://doi.org/10.4037/ccn2013280

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Roussel, M. G., Gorham, N., Wilson, L., & Mangi, A. A. (2013). Improving recovery time following heart transplantation: The role of the multidisciplinary health care team. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 6, 293–302. https://doi.org/10.2147/jmdh.S31457

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Saint, S., Fowler, K. E., Krein, S. L., Flanders, S. A., Bodnar, T. W., Young, E., & Moseley, R. H, et al. (2013). An academic hospitalist model to improve healthcare worker communication and learner education: Results from a quasi-experimental study at a veterans affairs medical center. Journal of Hospital Medicine, 8(12), 702–710. https://doi.org/10.1002/jhm.2105

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Oshimura, J. M., Downs, S. M., & Saysana, M. (2014). Family-centered rounding: Can it impact the time of discharge and time of completion of studies at an academic children’s hospital?. Hospital Pediatrics, 4(4), 228–232. https://doi.org/10.1542/hpeds.2013-0085

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Palokas, J. M., Northington, L., Wilkerson, R. R., & Boss, B. J. (2014). An interactive evaluation of patient/family centered rounds on pediatric inpatient units. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 30(4), e9–e15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2014.11.005

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Seigel, J., Whalen, L., Burgess, E., Joyner, B. L., Purdy, A., Saunders, R., & Willis, T. S, et al. (2014). Successful implementation of standardized multidisciplinary bedside rounds, including daily goals, in a pediatric ICU. Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, 40(2), 83–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1553-7250(14)40010-2

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Sharma, U., & Klocke, D. (2014). Attitudes of nursing staff toward interprofessional in-patient-centered rounding. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 28(5), 475–477. https://doi.org/10.3109/13561820.2014.907558

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Southwick, F., Lewis, M., Treloar, D., Cherabuddi, K., Radhakrishnan, N., Leverence, R., Xiaoxia, H., & Cottler, L, et al. (2014). Applying athletic principles to medical rounds to improve teaching and patient care. Academic Medicine, 89(7), 1018–1023. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000278

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Wrobleski, D. M., Joswiak, M. E., Dunn, D. F., Maxson, P. M., & Holland, D. E. (2014). Discharge planning rounds to the bedside: A patient- and family-centered approach. MEDSURG Nursing, 23(2), 111–116. https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.offcampus.lib.washington.edu/24933789/

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Berkwitt, A., & Grossman, M. (2015). A qualitative analysis of pediatric patient attitudes regarding family-centered rounds. Hospital Pediatrics, 5(7), 357–362. https://doi.org/10.1542/hpeds.2014-0198

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Gausvik, C., Lautar, A., Miller, L., Pallerla, H., & Schlaudecker, J. (2015). Structured nursing communication on interdisciplinary acute care teams improves perceptions of safety, efficiency, understanding of care plan and teamwork as well as job satisfaction. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 8, 33–37. https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S72623

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Shaughnessy, L., & Jackson, J. (2015). Introduction of a new ward round approach in a cardiothoracic critical care unit. Nursing in Critical Care, 20(4), 210–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/nicc.12149

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Stein, J., Payne, C., Methvin, A., Bonsall, J. M., Chadwick, L., Clark, D., Castle, B. W., Tong, D., & Dressler, D. D, et al. (2015). Reorganizing a hospital ward as an accountable care unit. Journal of Hospital Medicine, 10(1), 36–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/jhm.2284

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Tripathi, S., Arteaga, G., Rohlik, G., Boynton, B., Graner, K., & Ouellette, Y, et al. (2015). Implementation of patient-centered bedside rounds in the pediatric intensive care unit. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 30(2), 160–166. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCQ.0000000000000107

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Allen, S. R., Pascual, J., Martin, N., Reilly, P., Luckianow, G., Datner, E., Davis, K., & Kaplan, L. J, et al. (2016). A novel method of optimizing patient- and family-centered care in the ICU. The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, 82(3), 582–586. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000001332

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Braus, N., Campbell, T. C., Kwekkeboom, K. L., Ferguson, S., Harvey, C., Krupp, A. E., Lohmeier, T., Repplinger, M. D., Westergaard, R. P., Jacobs, E. A., Roberts, K. F., & Ehlenbach, W. J, et al. (2016). Prospective study of a proactive palliative care rounding intervention in a medical ICU. Intensive Care Medicine, 42(1), 54–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-015-4098-1

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Gustafson, K. W., LaBrecque, M. A., Graham, D. A., Tella, N. M., & Curley, M. A. (2016). Effect of parent presence during multidisciplinary rounds on NICU-related parental stress. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, and Neonatal Nursing, 45(5), 661–670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogn.2016.04.012

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Henkin, S., Chon, T. Y., Christopherson, M. L., Halvorsen, A. J., Worden, L. M., & Ratelle, J. T, et al. (2016). Improving nurse-physician teamwork through interprofessional bedside rounding. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 9, 201–205.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Justice, L. B., Cooper, D. S., Henderson, C., Brown, J., Simon, K., Clark, L., Fleckenstein, E., Benscoter, A., & Nelson, D. P, et al. (2016). Improving communication during cardiac ICU multidisciplinary rounds through visual display of patient daily goals. Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, 17(7), 677–683. https://doi.org/10.1097/PCC.0000000000000790

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Okere, A. N., Renier, C. M., & Willemstein, M. (2016). Comparison of a pharmacist-hospitalist collaborative model of inpatient care with multidisciplinary rounds in achieving quality measures. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 73(4), 216–224. https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp150225

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

O’Leary, K. J., Killarney, A., Hansen, L. O., Jones, S., Malladi, M., Marks, K., & Shah, M., & H, et al. (2016). Effect of patient-centred bedside rounds on hospitalised patients’ decision control, activation and satisfaction with care. BMJ Quality & Safety, 25(12), 921–928. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004561

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Young, E., Paulk, J., Beck, J., Anderson, M., Burck, M., Jobman, L., & Stickrath, C, et al. (2018). Impact of altered medication administration time on interdisciplinary bedside rounds on academic medical ward. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 32(3), 218–225. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCQ.0000000000000233

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Dunn, A. S., Reyna, M., Radbill, B., Parides, M., Colgan, C., Osio, T., Benson, A., Brown, N., Cambe, J., Zwerling, M., Egorova, N., & Kaplan, H, et al. (2017). The impact of bedside interdisciplinary rounds on length of stay and complications. Journal of Hospital Medicine, 12(3), 137–142. https://doi.org/10.12788/jhm.2695

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hendricks, S., LaMothe, V. J., Kara, A., & Miller, J. (2017). Facilitators and barriers for interprofessional rounding: A qualitative study. Clinical Nurse Specialist, 31(4), 219–228. https://doi.org/10.1097/NUR.0000000000000310

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Huang, K. T., Minahan, J., Brita-Rossi, P., Aylward, P., Katz, J. T., Roy, C., Schnipper, J., & Boxer, R, et al. (2017). All together now: impact of a regionalization and bedside rounding initiative on the efficiency and inclusiveness of clinical rounds. Journal of Hospital Medicine, 12(3), 150–156. https://doi.org/10.12788/jhm.2696

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Huynh, E., Basic, D., Gonzales, R., & Shanley, C. (2017). Structured interdisciplinary bedside rounds do not reduce length of hospital stay and 28-day re-admission rate among older people hospitalised with acute illness: an Australian study. Australian Health Review, 41(6), 599–605. https://doi.org/10.1071/AH16019

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Luthy, C., Francis Gerstel, P., Pugliesi, A., Piguet, V., Allaz, A. F., & Cedraschi, C, et al. (2017). Bedside or not bedside: evaluation of patient satisfaction in intensive medical rehabilitation wards. PloS One, 12(2), e0170474. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0170474

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

McGrath, B. A., Lynch, J., Bonvento, B., Wallace, S., Poole, V., Farrell, A., Diaz, C., Khwaja, S., & Roberson, D. W, et al. (2017). Evaluating the quality improvement impact of the global tracheostomy collaborative in four diverse NHS hospitals. BMJ Quality Improvement Reports, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjquality.u220636.w7996

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Monash, B., Najafi, N., Mourad, M., Rajkomar, A., Ranji, S. R., Fang, M. C., Glass, M., Milev, D., Ding, Y., Shen, A., Sharpe, B. A., & Harrison, J. D, et al. (2017). Standardized attending rounds to improve the patient experience: A pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial. Journal of Hospital Medicine, 12(3), 143–149. https://doi.org/10.12788/jhm.2694

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Thorne, K., Andersson-Gare, B., Hult, H., & Abrandt-Dahlgren, M. (2017). Co-producing interprofessional round work: designing spaces for patient partnership. Quality Management in Health Care, 26(2), 70–82. https://doi.org/10.1097/QMH.0000000000000133

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Abu-Rish Blakeney, E., Lavallee, D. C., Baik, D., Pambianco, S., O’Brien, K. D., & Zierler, B. K, et al. (2018). Purposeful interprofessional team intervention improves relational coordination among advanced heart failure care teams. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 33(5), 481–489. https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2018.1560248

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Baik, D., & Zierler, B. (2018). RN job satisfaction and retention after an interprofessional team intervention. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 41(4), 615–630. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193945918770815

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Basic, D., Huynh, E., Gonzales, R., & Shanley, C. (2018). Structured interdisciplinary bedside rounds, in-hospital deaths, and new nursing home placements among older inpatients. Clinical Interventions in Aging, 13, 2289–2294. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S171508

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Cao, V., Tan, L. D., Horn, F., Bland, D., Giri, P., Maken, K., Cho, N., Scott, L., Dinh, V. A., Hidalgo, D., & Nguyen, H. B, et al. (2018). Patient-centered structured interdisciplinary bedside rounds in the medical ICU. Critical Care Medicine, 46(1), 85–92. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000002807

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Chow, M. Y., Nikolic, S., Shetty, A., & Lai, K. (2018). Structured interdisciplinary bedside rounds in an Australian tertiary hospital emergency department: patient satisfaction and staff perspectives. Emergency Medicine Australasia, 31(3), 347–354. https://doi.org/10.1111/1742-6723.13160

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Clay-Williams, R., Plumb, J., Luscombe, G. M., Hawke, C., Dalton, H., Shannon, G., & Johnson, J, et al. (2018). Improving teamwork and patient outcomes with daily structured interdisciplinary bedside rounds: A multimethod evaluation. Journal of Hospital Medicine, 13(5), 311–317. https://doi.org/10.12788/jhm.2850

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Cody, S. E., Sullivan-Bolyai, S., & Reid-Ponte, P. (2018). Making a connection: family experiences with bedside rounds in the intensive care unit. Critical Care Nurse, 38(3), 18–26. https://doi.org/10.4037/ccn2018128

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Khan, A., Spector, N. D., Baird, J. D., Ashland, M., Starmer, A. J., Rosenbluth, G., & Landrigan, C. P, et al. (2018). Patient safety after implementation of a coproduced family centered communication programme: multicenter before and after intervention study. BMJ, 363, k4764. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k4764

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Li, J., Talari, P., Kelly, A., Latham, B., Dotson, S., Manning, K., Thornsberry, L., Swartz, C., & Williams, M. V, et al. (2018). Interprofessional teamwork innovation model (ITIM) to promote communication and patient-centred, coordinated care. BMJ Quality & Safety, 27(9), 700–709. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2017-007369

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Malec, A., Mork, A., Hoffman, R., & Carlson, E. (2018). The care team visit: approaching interdisciplinary rounds with renewed focus. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 33(2), 135–142. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCQ.0000000000000279

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mork, A., Krupp, A., Hankwitz, J., & Malec, A. (2018). Using kotter’s change framework to implement and sustain multiple complementary ICU initiatives. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 33(1), 38–45. https://doi.org/10.1097/ncq.0000000000000263

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Vega, M. W., Juarez, M., Lee, J. Y., Srivaths, P., Williams, E., & Akcan Arikan, A, et al. (2018). Quality improvement bedside rounding audits enhance protein provision for pediatric patients receiving continuous renal replacement therapy. Pediatric Critical Care Medicine?: A Journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies, 19(11), 1054–1058. https://doi.org/10.1097/PCC.0000000000001698

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Wickersham, A., Johnson, K., Kamath, A., & Kaboli, P. J. (2018). Novel use of communication technology to improve nurse-physician communication, teamwork, and care coordination during bedside rounds. Journal of Communication in Healthcare, 11(1), 56–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538068.2018.1431425

 Google Scholar

Bekmezian, A., Fiore, D. M., Long, M., Monash, B. J., Padrez, R., Rosenbluth, G., & Sun, K. I, et al. (2019). Keeping time: implementing appointment-based family-centered rounds. Pediatric Quality and Safety, 4(4), e182. https://doi.org/10.1097/pq9.0000000000000182

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Gormley, D. K., Costanzo, A. J., Goetz, J., Israel, J., Hill-Clark, J., Pritchard, T., & Staubach, K, et al. (2019). Impact of nurse-led interprofessional rounding on patient experience. The Nursing Clinics of North America, 54(1), 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnur.2018.10.007

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ha, D. R., Forte, M. B., Olans, R. D., Yong, K. O., Olans, R. N., Gluckstein, D. P., Kullar, R., Desai, M., Catipon, N., Ancheta, V., Lira, D., Khattak, Y., Legge, J., Nguyen, K. B., Chan, S., Mourani, J., & McKinnell, J. A, et al. (2019). A multidisciplinary approach to incorporate bedside nurses into antimicrobial stewardship and infection prevention. The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, 45(9), 600–605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjq.2019.03.003

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lopez, M., Vaks, Y., Wilson, M., Mitchell, K., Lee, C., Ejike, J., Oei, G., Kaufman, D., Hambly, J., Tinsley, C., Bahk, T., Samayoa, C., Pappas, J., & Abd-Allah, S, et al. (2019). Impacting satisfaction, learning, and efficiency through structured interdisciplinary rounding in a pediatric intensive care unit: A quality improvement project. Pediatric Quality and Safety, 4(3), e176. https://doi.org/10.1097/pq9.0000000000000176

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Opper, K., Beiler, J., Yakusheva, O., & Weiss, M. (2019). Effects of implementing a health team communication redesign on hospital readmissions within 30 days. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 16(2), 121–130. https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12350

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Akuamoah-Boateng, K. A., Wiencek, C., Esquivel, J. H., DeGennaro, G., Torres, B., & Whelan, J. F, et al. (2019). Ramped-up: the development and testing of an interprofessional collaboration model. Journal of Trauma Nursing, 26(6), 281–289. https://doi.org/10.1097/JTN.0000000000000466

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Austin, S., Powers, K., Florea, S., & Gaston, T. (2020). Evaluation of a nurse practitioner-led project to improve communication and collaboration in the acute care setting. Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1097/JXX.0000000000000402

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Barcellos, R. A., & Chatkin, J. M. (2020). Impact of a multidisciplinary checklist on the duration of invasive mechanical ventilation and length of ICU stay. Jornal Brasileiro De Pneumologia, 46(3), e20180261–3756.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Chava, R., Karki, N., Ketlogetswe, K., & Ayala, T. (2020). Multidisciplinary rounds in prevention of 30-day readmissions and decreasing length of stay in heart failure patients: A community hospital based retrospective study. Medicine (Baltimore), 98(27), e16233. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000016233

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Clarke, D., Nguyen, D., & Overton, K. (2020). Antimicrobial stewardship in spinal cord injury: A multidisciplinary approach. Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790268.2020.1731225

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kang, J., Cho, Y. J., & Choi, S. (2020). State anxiety, uncertainty in illness, and needs of family members of critically ill patients and their experiences with family-centered multidisciplinary rounds: A mixed model study. PLoS One, 15(6), e0234296. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0234296

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Redley, B., Campbell, D., Stockman, K., & Barnes, S. (2020). Mixed methods quality evaluation of structured interprofessional medical ward rounds. Internal Medicine Journal, 50(2), 222–231. https://doi.org/10.1111/imj.14330

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sunkara, P. R., Islam, T., Bose, A., Rosenthal, G. E., Chevli, P., Jogu, H., Tk, L. A., Huang, -C.-C., Chaudhary, D., Beekman, D., Dutta, A., Menon, S., & Speiser, J. L, et al. (2020). Impact of structured interdisciplinary bedside rounding on patient outcomes at a large academic health centre. BMJ Quality & Safety, 29(7), 569–575. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009936

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Harris, P. A., Taylor, R., Thielke, R., Payne, J., Gonzalez, N., & Conde, J. G, et al. (2009). Research electronic data capture (REDCap) A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 42(2), 377–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar