Search results

Background: Adults and children with chronic illness often require services from multiple providers. Individualized plans of care (IPCs) are sometimes developed to improve care coordination. However, their association with improved outcomes is unknown. Methods: We searched literature published between January 2001 and October 2011, using Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsychINFO, and bibliographic review. Eligible studies involved an IPC with input from the patient and/or family of individuals with chronic illness, evaluated outcomes, and were conducted in the United States. We assessed evidence quality using Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine criteria. Results: 15 studies met inclusion criteria. Studies were heterogeneous regarding populations and outcomes examined and were generally low quality. Most described IPC use within a multifaceted care coordination intervention. The strongest evidence links IPC use and symptom improvement in depressed adults; the weakest evidence exists for outcomes in children. Vague descriptions of the IPCs' limited analysis. Conclusions: Current evidence supporting an association between IPC use and improved outcomes, particularly among children, is sparse. Well-designed evaluations of clearly described IPCs are needed to examine who should be involved in their development, what they should include, and how often they should be updated to improve outcomes of care for this vulnerable population.

Aims and objectives To inform and guide the development of a future model of specialist and advanced nursing and midwifery practice. Background There is a sizable body of empirical literature supporting the unique contributions of specialist and advanced practice roles to health care. However, there is very little international evidence to inform the integration of a future model for advanced or specialist practice in the Irish healthcare system. Design A qualitative study was conducted to initiate this important area of inquiry. Methods Purposive sampling was used to generate a sample of informants (n = 15) for the interviews. Nurses and midwives working in specialist and advanced practice and participants from other areas such as legislative, regulatory, policy, medicine and education were included in the sampling frame. Results Arguments for a new model of specialist and advanced practice were voiced. A number of participants proposed that flexibility within specialist and advanced practitioner career pathways was essential. Otherwise, there existed the possibility of being directed into specialised "silos," precluding movement to another area of integrated practice. Future specialist and advanced practice education programmes need to include topics such as the development of emotional and political intelligence. Conclusion The contribution of specialist and advanced practice roles to the health service includes providing rapid access to care, seamless patient flow across services, early discharge and lead coordinator of the patient's care trajectory. There was a recommendation of moving towards a universal model to cultivate specialist and advanced nurse and midwife practitioners.