Objective To investigate the effects of weaning protocols on the total duration of mechanical ventilation, mortality, adverse events, quality of life, weaning duration, and length of stay in the intensive care unit and hospital.Design Systematic review.Data sources Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, ISI Web of Science, ISI Conference Proceedings, Cambridge Scientific Abstracts, and reference lists of articles. We did not apply language restrictions.Review methods We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of weaning from mechanical ventilation with and without protocols in critically ill adults.Data selection Three authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. A priori subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed. We contacted study authors for additional information.Results Eleven trials that included 1971 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with usual care, the geometric mean duration of mechanical ventilation in the weaning protocol group was reduced by 25% (95% confidence interval 9% to 39%, P=0.006; 10 trials); the duration of weaning was reduced by 78% (31% to 93%, P=0.009; six trials); and stay in the intensive care unit length by 10% (2% to 19%, P=0.02; eight trials). There was significant heterogeneity among studies for total duration of mechanical ventilation (I2=76%, P<0.01) and duration of weaning (I2=97%, P<0.01), which could not be explained by subgroup analyses based on type of unit or type of approach.Conclusion There is evidence of a reduction in the duration of mechanical ventilation, weaning, and stay in the intensive care unit when standardised weaning protocols are used, but there is significant heterogeneity among studies and an insufficient number of studies to investigate the source of this heterogeneity. Some studies suggest that organisational context could influence outcomes, but this could not be evaluated as it was outside the scope of this review.

The World Health Organisation amongst others recognises the need for the introduction of clinical supervision education in health professional education as a central strategy for improving patient safety and patient care. Online and blended learning methods are growing exponentially in use in higher education and the systematic evaluation of these methods will aid understanding of how best to teach clinical supervision. The purpose of this study was to test whether undergraduate nursing students who received clinical supervisee skills training via a blended learning approach would score higher in terms of motivation and attitudes towards clinical supervision, knowledge of clinical supervision and satisfaction of learning method, when compared to those students who received an online only teaching approach. A post-test-only randomised controlled trial. Participants were a total of 122 pre-registration nurses enrolled at one United Kingdom university, randomly assigned to the online learning control group (n = 60) or the blended learning intervention group (n = 62). The blended learning intervention group participated in a face-to-face tutorial and the online clinical supervisee skills training app. The online learning control group participated in an online discussion forum and the same online clinical supervisee skills training app. The outcome measures were motivation and attitudes using the modified Manchester Clinical Supervision Scale, knowledge using a 10 point Multiple Choice Questionnaire and satisfaction using a university training evaluation tool. Statistical analysis was performed using independent t-tests to compare the differences between the means of the control group and the intervention group. Thematic analysis was used to analyse responses to open-ended questions. All three of our study hypotheses were confirmed. Participants who received clinical supervisee skills training via a blended learning approach scored higher in terms of motivation and attitudes - mean (m) = 85.5, standard deviation (sd) = 9.78, number of participants (n) = 62 - compared to the online group (m = 79.5, sd = 9.69, n = 60) (p = .001). The blended learning group also scored higher in terms of knowledge (m = 4.2, sd = 1.43, n = 56) compared to the online group (m = 3.51, sd = 1.51, n = 57) (p = .015); and in terms of satisfaction (m = 30.89, sd = 6.54, n = 57) compared to the online group (m = 26.49, sd = 6.93, n = 55) (p = .001). Qualitative data supported results. Blended learning provides added pedagogical value when compared to online learning in terms of teaching undergraduate nurses clinical supervision skills. The evidence is timely given worldwide calls for expanding clinical skills supervision in undergraduate health professional education to improve quality of care and patient safety.

In the perceived hierarchy of research designs, the results from randomised controlled trials are considered to provide the highest level of evidence. Indeed, these trials have been upheld as the gold standard in research. The benefits and limitations of the randomised controlled trial as a method of evaluating the effectiveness of healthcare interventions are presented. The paper then examines the different levels of complexity within healthcare interventions and the problems this poses in determining effectiveness. In an effort to provide a solution to this problem, the Medical Research Council produced a framework to assist investigators to develop and evaluate complex healthcare interventions. The framework is described with reference to an example of implementing and evaluating protocols for weaning patients in the intensive care unit. The framework is critiqued on the basis that it involves an ambiguous or contradictory ontology, which fails to articulate the relationship between the positivism of randomised controlled trials with the relativism of qualitative approaches. It is concluded that the use of realist strategies in combination with randomised controlled trials provides the most coherent solution to this quandary.

Patients with end-stage kidney disease have a high mortality rate and disease burden. Despite this, many do not speak with health care professionals about end-of-life issues. Advance care planning is recommended in this context but is complex and challenging. We carried out a realist review to identify factors affecting its implementation. The objectives of this study are 1) to identify implementation theories; 2) to identify factors that help or hinder implementation; and 3) to develop theory on how the intervention may work. We carried out a systematic realist review, searching seven electronic databases: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect. Sixty-two papers were included in the review. We identified two intervention stages-1) training for health care professionals that addresses concerns, optimizes skills, and clarifies processes and 2) use of documentation and processes that are simple, individually tailored, culturally appropriate, and involve surrogates. These processes work as patients develop trust in professionals, participate in discussions, and clarify values and beliefs about their condition. This leads to greater congruence between patients and surrogates; increased quality of communication between patients and professionals; and increased completion of advance directives. Advance care planning is hindered by lack of training; administrative complexities; pressures of routine care; patients overestimating life expectancy; and when patients, family, and/or clinical staff are reluctant to initiate discussions. It is more likely to succeed where organizations treat it as core business; when the process is culturally appropriate and takes account of patient perceptions; and when patients are willing to consider death and dying with suitably trained staff.