The impact of regular multidisciplinary team interventions on psychotropic prescribing in Swedish nursing homes. Can a facilitated programme promote effective multidisciplinary audit in secondary care teams? An exploratory trial. Benefits of multidisciplinary case conferencing using audiovisual compared with telephone communication: a randomized controlled trial. Effects of interdisciplinary rounds on length of stay in a telemetry unit. A firm trial of interdisciplinary rounds on the inpatient medical wards: an intervention designed using continuous quality improvement.
To evaluate the impact of regular multidisciplinary team interventions on the quantity and quality of psychotropic drug prescribing in Swedish nursing homes.
                A randomized controlled trial.
                A sample of 33 nursing homes: 15 experimental homes and 18 control homes representing 5% of all Swedish nursing homes.
                The sample consisted of 1854 long-term care residents with an average age of 83 years. Seventy percent of the residents were women, and 42% had a documented diagnosis of dementia. An additional 5% had a psychotic disorder, and 7% had a diagnosis of depression.
                Experimental homes participated in an outreach program that was designed to influence drug use through improved teamwork among physicians, pharmacists, nurses, and nurses' assistants. Multidisciplinary team meetings were held on a regular basis throughout the 12-month study period.
                Lists of each resident's prescriptions were collected 1 month before and 1 month after the 12-month intervention. Measures included the proportion of residents with any psychotropic drug, polymedicine, and therapeutic duplication and proportion of residents with nonrecommended and acceptable drugs in each psychotropic drug class, as defined by current Swedish guidelines.
                Baseline results show extensive psychotropic drug prescribing, with the most commonly prescribed drugs being hypnotics (40%), anxiolytics (40%), and antipsychotics (38%). After 12 months of team meetings in the experimental homes, there was a significant decrease in the prescribing of psychotics (-19%), benzodiazepine hypnotics (-37%), and antidepressants (-59%). Orders for more acceptable antidepressants also increased in the experimental homes. In the control homes there was increased use of acceptable antidepressants, but there were no significant reductions in other drug classes.
                There is excessive prescription of psychotropic drugs in Swedish nursing homes. Improved teamwork among caregivers can improve prescribing as defined by clinical guidelines. This 24-month exploratory study evaluated whether a 6-month programme supported by a trained external facilitator was feasible, acceptable and led to the adoption of a multidisciplinary approach to audit by secondary care staff. Undertaken in five acute hospital sites in the East Midlands UK, 22 multidisciplinary teams were randomised to either an intervention or control arm. Employing mixed methods, a range of outcomes, including collaborative behaviour, was measured. The intervention was feasible and acceptable to staff. Involvement in the facilitated programme had a positive impact on self-reported knowledge (P=0.000 post-intervention and at 4-months follow-up), skills (P=0.000 post-intervention and P=0.02 at 4-months follow-up) and attitudes (P<0.01 post-intervention), appeared to have some influence on improving self-reported (P<0.05 post-intervention) and observed collaborative behaviour (P=0.01) and led to better quality audit resulting in measurable improvements to care. Improved collaborative behaviour may have resulted from an increase in assertive behaviour by nurses. Research to test approaches to support teams to work effectively together is currently hampered by a lack of suitable research instruments and needs addressing before main (phase 111) trials are undertaken. Multidisciplinary case conferencing using a video-link was compared with multidisciplinary case conferencing by telephone. One hundred patients were randomized to either videoconferencing (intervention group, 50 patients) or audioconferencing (control group, 50 patients). The effectiveness of the intervention compared with the control was evaluated in terms of: the number of conferences per patient, average length of conference, length of treatment, number of occasions of service, degree of multidisciplinary team involvement, recorded level of communication, quality of the management plan (in terms of the number of points contained in it) and staff satisfaction. The intervention and control groups showed significant differences on only two of the outcome measures: the mean number of case conferences per patient was less for the intervention group, and the intervention group had a shorter length of treatment (6 days) than the control group (10 days). The study did not demonstrate any significant differences in occasions of service or time commitment, which might have resulted in lower costs. However, the introduction of case conferencing by video-link was accompanied by a high level of satisfaction on the part of the 14 team members who were interviewed. Interdisciplinary rounds (IRs) have been proposed to improve staff communication and reduce LOS. There have been no studies of IRs on an inpatient telemetry ward. Patients on a telemetry unit of a community hospital were randomly assigned to either an IR intervention or standard care. Charts were reviewed to determine LOS, patient characteristics, and indirect indices of quality of care.
                Daily work rounds, in which resident physicians, nurses, and ancillary staff meet to discuss patients on the team.
                84 patients were enrolled, 42 randomized to the intervention and 42 to standard care. There was no significant difference in LOS. Indirect measures of quality of care (dietician, pharmacist, or physical therapist visit) did not differ. In a multiple linear regression model, only abnormal laboratory data, the presence of dementia, and the presence of a home health aid significantly predicted LOS.
                IRs did not decrease LOS in a telemetry ward. Whereas a potential benefit of IRs in other settings cannot be ruled out, this study emphasizes the importance of rigorous testing of strategies to enhance the quality or reduce the costs of inpatient care. In August 1993 a group of house staff and nursing staff at MetroHealth Medical Center formed a quality improvement team to evaluate the process of medical care on the inpatient wards. Using standard continuous quality improvement (CQI) methods, a team of medical interns, nurses, and other health professionals involved in patient care on the medicine inpatient service designed interdisciplinary, daily work rounds to improve the care of patients on the inpatient wards.
                The authors conducted a randomized, controlled firm trial of the impact of interdisciplinary rounds on the inpatient medicine services. The trial lasted 6 months (November 1993-April 1994) and included 1,102 admissions randomly assigned to experimental or control teams by the pre-existing firm system. Of the 1,102 admissions included in the study, 535 were randomized to medical services with traditional rounds and 567 to medical services with interdisciplinary rounds. The outcomes studied included length of stay (LOS), total hospital charges, provider satisfaction, and ancillary service efficiency.
                Unadjusted analysis for log-transformed data showed lower length of stay and total charges for the interdisciplinary group. The mean LOS for interdisciplinary rounds was 5.46 days, compared with 6.06 days for traditional care (P = 0.006), whereas mean total charges were $6,681 and $8,090 (P = 0.002) for the two groups, respectively. After multivariate regression analysis using a propensity score that included gender, age, marital status, admission source, diagnosis-related group (DRG) weight, and primary diagnosis by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) cluster, these differences remained statistically significant.
                Previous studies of interdisciplinary teams have failed to show statistically significant cost savings. This study involving more patients shows both cost and LOS decreases with the use of interdisciplinary teams. At the end of the 6-month trial, interdisciplinary rounds were instituted on all medicine inpatient services.
In this updated review, we found five studies (four new studies) that met the inclusion criteria. The review suggests that practice-based IPC interventions can improve healthcare processes and outcomes, but due to the limitations in terms of the small number of studies, sample sizes, problems with conceptualising and measuring collaboration, and heterogeneity of interventions and settings, it is difficult to draw generalisable inferences about the key elements of IPC and its effectiveness. More rigorous, cluster randomised studies with an explicit focus on IPC and its measurement, are needed to provide better evidence of the impact of practice-based IPC interventions on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. These studies should include qualitative methods to provide insight into how the interventions affect collaboration and how improved collaboration contributes to changes in outcomes.