{Reference Type}: Systematic Review
{Title}: Effectiveness of interprofessional tracheostomy teams: A systematic review.
{Author}: Ninan A;Grubb LM;Brenner MJ;Pandian V;
{Journal}: J Clin Nurs
{Volume}: 32
{Issue}: 19
{Year}: 2023 Oct 3
{Factor}: 4.423
{DOI}: 10.1111/jocn.16815
{Abstract}: <B>OBJECTIVE: </B>To systematically locate, evaluate and synthesize evidence regarding effectiveness of interprofessional tracheostomy teams in increasing speaking valve use and decreasing time to speech and decannulation, adverse events, lengths of stay (intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital) and mortality. In addition, to evaluate facilitators and barriers to implementing an interprofessional tracheostomy team in hospital settings.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>Systematic review using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Model's guidance.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>Our clinical question: Do interprofessional tracheostomy teams increase speaking valve use and decrease time to speech and decannulation, adverse events, lengths of stay and mortality? Primary studies involving adult patients with a tracheostomy were included. Eligible studies were systematically reviewed by two reviewers and verified by another two reviewers.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>Fourteen studies met eligibility criteria; primarily pre-post intervention cohort studies. Percent increase in speaking valve use ranged 14%-275%; percent reduction in median days to speech ranged 33%-73% and median days to decannulation ranged 26%-32%; percent reduction in rate of adverse events ranged 32%-88%; percent reduction in median hospital length of stay days ranged 18-40 days; no significant change in overall ICU length of stay and mortality rates. Facilitators include team education, coverage, rounds, standardization, communication, lead personnel and automation, patient tracking; barrier is financial.<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>Patients with tracheostomy who received care from a dedicated interprofessional team showed improvements in several clinical outcomes.<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>Additional high-quality evidence from rigorous, well-controlled and adequately powered studies are necessary, as are implementation strategies to promote broader adoption of interprofessional tracheostomy team strategies. Interprofessional tracheostomy teams are associated with improved safety and quality of care.<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>Evidence from review provides rationale for broader implementation of interprofessional tracheostomy teams.<BR><B>UNASSIGNED: </B>PRISMA and Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM).<BR><B>UNASSIGNED: </B>None.