{"title":"新生儿重症监护室实施以证据为基础的早期关系健康干预的叙述性回顾。","authors":"Umber Darilek, Erin Finley, Jacqueline McGrath","doi":"10.1097/ANC.0000000000001151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Early relational health (ERH) interventions in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) buffer infants from toxic stress effects. Implementation science (IS) can guide successful uptake of evidence-based practice (EBP) ERH interventions. It is unknown if implementors of ERH interventions currently use the resources of IS to improve implementation.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>A narrative review of recent literature on implementation of ERH EBPs was completed to understand (a) which ERH interventions are currently being implemented in NICUs globally, (b) whether clinical implementors of ERH interventions have adopted the resources of IS, (c) existence of implementation gaps, and (d) implementation outcomes of ERH interventions in contemporary literature.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Scopus, PubMed, and CINHAL were searched for original research regarding implementation of dyadic ERH interventions using key words related to IS and ERH.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>For inclusion, ERH EBPs had to have been implemented exclusively in NICU settings, contained data addressing an IS domain, printed in English within the last 5 years. Twenty-four studies met inclusion criteria.</p><p><strong>Data extraction: </strong>Studies were distilled for intervention, IS domains addressed, location, aims, design, sample, and outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eleven ERH interventions were described in the literature. Few studies utilized the resources of IS, indicating variable degrees of success in implementation. Discussions of implementation cost were notably missing.</p><p><strong>Implications for practice and research: </strong>Implementors of ERH interventions appear to be largely unfamiliar with IS resources. More work is needed to reach clinicians with the tools and resources of IS to improve implementation outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":48862,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Neonatal Care","volume":"24 3","pages":"253-267"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Narrative Review of NICU Implementation of Evidence-Based Early Relational Health Interventions.\",\"authors\":\"Umber Darilek, Erin Finley, Jacqueline McGrath\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/ANC.0000000000001151\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Early relational health (ERH) interventions in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) buffer infants from toxic stress effects. Implementation science (IS) can guide successful uptake of evidence-based practice (EBP) ERH interventions. It is unknown if implementors of ERH interventions currently use the resources of IS to improve implementation.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>A narrative review of recent literature on implementation of ERH EBPs was completed to understand (a) which ERH interventions are currently being implemented in NICUs globally, (b) whether clinical implementors of ERH interventions have adopted the resources of IS, (c) existence of implementation gaps, and (d) implementation outcomes of ERH interventions in contemporary literature.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Scopus, PubMed, and CINHAL were searched for original research regarding implementation of dyadic ERH interventions using key words related to IS and ERH.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>For inclusion, ERH EBPs had to have been implemented exclusively in NICU settings, contained data addressing an IS domain, printed in English within the last 5 years. Twenty-four studies met inclusion criteria.</p><p><strong>Data extraction: </strong>Studies were distilled for intervention, IS domains addressed, location, aims, design, sample, and outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eleven ERH interventions were described in the literature. Few studies utilized the resources of IS, indicating variable degrees of success in implementation. Discussions of implementation cost were notably missing.</p><p><strong>Implications for practice and research: </strong>Implementors of ERH interventions appear to be largely unfamiliar with IS resources. More work is needed to reach clinicians with the tools and resources of IS to improve implementation outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48862,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Neonatal Care\",\"volume\":\"24 3\",\"pages\":\"253-267\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Neonatal Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/ANC.0000000000001151\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Neonatal Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ANC.0000000000001151","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:新生儿重症监护室(NICU)中的早期关系健康(ERH)干预措施可使婴儿免受毒性压力的影响。实施科学(IS)可以指导人们成功采用循证实践(EBP)ERH干预措施。目的:我们对近期有关ERH EBPs实施的文献进行了叙述性综述,以了解:(a)目前全球有哪些ERH干预措施正在NICU实施;(b)ERH干预措施的临床实施者是否采用了IS资源;(c)是否存在实施差距;以及(d)当代文献中ERH干预措施的实施结果:数据来源:使用与IS和ERH相关的关键词搜索Scopus、PubMed和CINHAL中有关实施双人ERH干预的原始研究:纳入的 ERH EBPs 必须是专门在新生儿重症监护病房环境中实施的,包含涉及 IS 领域的数据,并且是在过去 5 年中用英语印刷的。24项研究符合纳入标准:对研究的干预措施、涉及的 IS 领域、地点、目的、设计、样本和结果进行了提炼:结果:文献中介绍了 11 项 ERH 干预措施。很少有研究利用了信息系统的资源,这表明实施的成功程度各不相同。对实践和研究的影响:对实践和研究的启示:ERH干预措施的实施者似乎大多不熟悉IS资源。我们需要做更多的工作,向临床医生宣传信息系统的工具和资源,以提高实施效果。
A Narrative Review of NICU Implementation of Evidence-Based Early Relational Health Interventions.
Background: Early relational health (ERH) interventions in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) buffer infants from toxic stress effects. Implementation science (IS) can guide successful uptake of evidence-based practice (EBP) ERH interventions. It is unknown if implementors of ERH interventions currently use the resources of IS to improve implementation.
Purpose: A narrative review of recent literature on implementation of ERH EBPs was completed to understand (a) which ERH interventions are currently being implemented in NICUs globally, (b) whether clinical implementors of ERH interventions have adopted the resources of IS, (c) existence of implementation gaps, and (d) implementation outcomes of ERH interventions in contemporary literature.
Data sources: Scopus, PubMed, and CINHAL were searched for original research regarding implementation of dyadic ERH interventions using key words related to IS and ERH.
Study selection: For inclusion, ERH EBPs had to have been implemented exclusively in NICU settings, contained data addressing an IS domain, printed in English within the last 5 years. Twenty-four studies met inclusion criteria.
Data extraction: Studies were distilled for intervention, IS domains addressed, location, aims, design, sample, and outcomes.
Results: Eleven ERH interventions were described in the literature. Few studies utilized the resources of IS, indicating variable degrees of success in implementation. Discussions of implementation cost were notably missing.
Implications for practice and research: Implementors of ERH interventions appear to be largely unfamiliar with IS resources. More work is needed to reach clinicians with the tools and resources of IS to improve implementation outcomes.
期刊介绍:
Advances in Neonatal Care takes a unique and dynamic approach to the original research and clinical practice articles it publishes. Addressing the practice challenges faced every day—caring for the 40,000-plus low-birth-weight infants in Level II and Level III NICUs each year—the journal promotes evidence-based care and improved outcomes for the tiniest patients and their families. Peer-reviewed editorial includes unique and detailed visual and teaching aids, such as Family Teaching Toolbox, Research to Practice, Cultivating Clinical Expertise, and Online Features.
Each issue offers Continuing Education (CE) articles in both print and online formats.