Background
Care bundles are small sets of evidence-based recommendations, designed to support the implementation of evidence-based best clinical practice. However, there is variation in the design and implementation of care bundles, which may impact on the fidelity of delivery and subsequently their clinical effectiveness.
Methods
A scoping review was carried out using the Arksey and O’Malley framework to identify the literature reporting on the design, implementation and evaluation of care bundles. The Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane and Ovid MEDLINE databases were searched for manuscripts published between 2001 and November 2017; hand-searching of references and citations was also undertaken. Data were initially assessed using a quality assessment tool, the Downs and Black checklist, prior to further analysis and narrative synthesis. Implementation strategies were classified using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) criteria.
Results
Twenty-eight thousand six hundred ninety-two publications were screened and 348 articles retrieved in full text. Ninety-nine peer-reviewed quantitative publications were included for data extraction. These consisted of one randomised crossover trial, one randomised cluster trial, one case-control study, 20 prospective cohort studies and 76 non-parallel cohort studies. Twenty-three percent of studies were classified as poor based on Downs and Black checklist, and reporting of implementation strategies lacked structure.
Negative associations were found between the number of elements in a bundle and compliance (Spearman’s rho = − 0.47, non-parallel cohort and − 0.65, prospective cohort studies), and between the complexity of elements and compliance (
p
< 0.001, chi-squared = 23.05). Implementation strategies associated with improved compliance included evaluative and iterative approaches, development of stakeholder relationships and education and training strategies.
Conclusion
Care bundles with a small number of simple elements have better compliance rates. Standardised reporting of implementation strategies may help to implement care bundles into clinical practice with high fidelity.
Trial Registration
This review was registered on the PROSPERO database:
CRD 42015029963
in December 2015.
Electronic supplementary material
The online version of this article (10.1186/s13012-019-0894-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
The Calman and Hine (1995) Report, A Policy Framework for Commissioning Cancer Services, emphasizes the importance of good communication between all those caring for cancer patients (Calman and Hine, 1995). The report also stresses the need for appropriate procedures to be set up to facilitate the communication process. Taking this into consideration a study was undertaken to examine existing practices in communication between specialists working in cancer care and GPs. The aim of the study was to discover any problematic areas within the service, e.g. any failures or delays in the transmission of information. This article also examines ways in which improvements to the service could be made. The study findings led to a decision to introduce patient-held records. These records belong to the patients and are used by the patients and all health professionals involved in their care during the course of their illness. This scheme is currently being piloted and evaluated by cancer patients in four general practices.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.