Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGoyal, AA
dc.contributor.authorTur, K
dc.contributor.authorMann, J
dc.contributor.authorTownsend, W
dc.contributor.authorFlanders, SA
dc.contributor.authorChopra, V
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-31T21:54:32Z
dc.date.available2020-03-31T21:54:32Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.issn1553-5592
dc.identifier.doi10.12788/jhm.2871
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/392829
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Although common, the impact of low-cost bedside visual tools, such as whiteboards, on patient care is unclear. PURPOSE: To systematically review the literature and assess the influence of bedside visual tools on patient satisfaction. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, SCOPUS, Web of Science, CINAHL, and CENTRAL. DATA EXTRACTION: Studies of adult or pediatric hospitalized patients reporting physician identification, understanding of provider roles, patient–provider communication, and satisfaction with care from the use of visual tools were included. Outcomes were categorized as positive, negative, or neutral based on survey responses for identification, communication, and satisfaction. Two reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of study bias. DATA SYNTHESIS: Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Visual tools included whiteboards (n = 4), physician pictures (n = 7), whiteboard and picture (n = 1), electronic medical record-based patient portals (n = 3), and formatted notepads (n = 1). Tools improved patients’ identification of providers (13/13 studies). The impact on understanding the providers’ roles was largely positive (8/10 studies). Visual tools improved patient–provider communication (4/5 studies) and satisfaction (6/8 studies). In adults, satisfaction varied between positive with the use of whiteboards (2/5 studies) and neutral with pictures (1/5 studies). Satisfaction related to pictures in pediatric patients was either positive (1/3 studies) or neutral (1/3 studies). Differences in tool format (individual pictures vs handouts with pictures of all providers) and study design (randomized vs cohort) may explain variable outcomes. CONCLUSION: The use of bedside visual tools appears to improve patient recognition of providers and patient–provider communication. Future studies that include better design and outcome assessment are necessary before widespread use can be recommended.
dc.description.peerreviewedYes
dc.languageEnglish
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherFrontline Medical Communications, Inc.
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom930
dc.relation.ispartofpageto936
dc.relation.ispartofissue11
dc.relation.ispartofjournalJournal of Hospital Medicine
dc.relation.ispartofvolume12
dc.subject.fieldofresearchClinical sciences
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode3202
dc.titleDo bedside visual tools improve patient and caregiver satisfaction? A systematic review of the literature
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articles
dcterms.bibliographicCitationGoyal, AA; Tur, K; Mann, J; Townsend, W; Flanders, SA; Chopra, V, Do bedside visual tools improve patient and caregiver satisfaction? A systematic review of the literature, Journal of Hospital Medicine, 2017, 12 (11), pp. 930-936
dc.date.updated2020-03-30T22:37:17Z
gro.rights.copyrightSelf-archiving of the author-manuscript version is not yet supported by this journal. Please refer to the journal link for access to the definitive, published version or contact the author[s] for more information.
gro.hasfulltextNo Full Text
gro.griffith.authorChopra, Vineet


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record