Humanization interventions in general pediatric wards: a systematic review
Humanization of care (HOC) interventions have rarely been evaluated and compared. We systematically reviewed the outcomes of published interventions aimed to improve the HOC for hospitalized children. PubMed and Scopus were used as data sources. Studies published between January 1, 2000, and February 28, 2018, were considered eligible if they reported analysis of results vs. either a control group or baseline, or if they measured patient/family/staff satisfaction. Neonatal age, emergency departments, and subspecialty settings were excluded. Data were extracted using a standardized data extraction form including study design, sample size, intervention, outcome/objective, and evaluation of results or pre- post-intervention satisfaction. Twenty-eight of the 12,012 retrieved articles met the inclusion criteria. Most studies were of moderate to low quality. Only six studies were of high quality. Areas of interest dealt with environment (n = 4), provider–patient relationship (n = 6), pet therapy (n = 5), technology (n = 5), family-centered rounds (n = 2), psychological support (n = 3), and staff training (n = 3). The overall trend of the results indicated that interventions were mostly effective and likely to have beneficial effects on several aspects of pediatric hospitalization.
What is Known:
• In pediatrics, humanization of care (HOC) provides assistance focused not only on the child as a patient, but on the whole family.
• HOC programs have been developed, but information on the overall outcome of local projects aiming to improve in a practical way the hospital taking charge of pediatric patients is still lacking.
What is New:
• Local HOC interventions are mostly effective and have beneficial effects on several aspects of hospitalization in general pediatrics wards.
• The findings of this review may have practice implications for planning HOC interventions by pediatric healthcare professionals.
KeywordsHumanization of care Pediatric hospitalization Humanization models Pediatric care
Humanization of care
Patient and family-centered care
Social determinants of health
Marina Tripodi, Maria Anna Siano, and Claudia Mandato: Drs. Tripodi, Siano, and Mandato participated in the development of the systematic review and equally contributed to the writing of the manuscript.
Anna Giulia Elena De Anseris, Paolo Quitadamo, and Salvatore Guercio Nuzio: Drs. De Anseris, Quitadamo, and Guercio Nuzio worked at specific sections of the literature search.
Pietro Vajro: Prof Vajro conceived and monitored the study quality as the senior author.
Paolo Siani and Pietro Vajro: Dr. Siani and Prof. Vajro supervised the design and execution of the study, performed the final data analyses, and contributed to the writing of the manuscript.
All authors approved the final manuscript as submitted and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.
This study received partial funding by the Region Campania Project for Pediatric Humanization Care Intervention [11 October 2014 Decree no. 105 (13 October 2014 BURC no. 70)].
Compliance with ethical statements
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 3.Branson SM, Boss L, Padhye NS et al (2017) Effects of animal-assisted activities on bio behavioral stress responses in hospitalized children: a randomized controlled study. J PediatrNurs 36:84–91Google Scholar
- 8.Conry MC, Humphries N, Morgan K et al (2012) A 10 year (2000-2010) systematic review of interventions to improve quality of care in hospitals. BMC Health Serv Res 24:275Google Scholar
- 16.Guidelines of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on child-friendly health care (2018) https://www.coe.int/en/web/children/child-friendly-healthcare. Accessed 3 Dec 2018
- 17.Joanna Briggs Institute. http://joannabriggs.org/research/critical-appraisal-tools.html. Accessed 30 Jan 2019
- 31.Negri B, Ministério da Saúde–Brasilia (2003) Processo de humanização dos serviços de saúde: a experiência do Programa Nacional de Humanização da Assistência Hospitalar – PNHAH”. http://ses.sp.bvs.br/lis/resource/17658#.W6vcAZMzaCR. Accessed 3 Dec 2018
- 33.Otero C, Luna D, Marcelo A et al (2015) Why patient centered care coordination is important in developing countries? Contribution of the IMIA Health Informatics for Development Working Group. Yearb Med Inform 13(10):30–33Google Scholar
- 35.Quality Rating Scheme (2009) Available from URL: https://www.cebm.net/2009/06/oxford-centre-evidence-based-medicine-levels-evidence-march-2009/. Accessed 3 Dec 2018
- 40.Rostami F, Hassan ST, Yaghmai F et al (2015) Effects of family-centered care on the satisfaction of parents of children hospitalized in pediatric wards in a pediatric ward in Chaloos in 2012. Electron Physician 5(7):1078–1084Google Scholar
- 42.Silva R, Oliveira E, Chagas M et al (2010) Reading as a method of humanized care in the pediatric neurological clinic: a qualitative study. OBJN 9(2). https://doi.org/10.5935/1676-4285.20103002
- 43.Simonelli I (2014) TAT: think and action tank on children’s right to health. http://ilariasimonelli79.wixsite.com/think-and-action/documents. Accessed 3 Dec 2018
- 46.Stinchi A, Cardinale V, Pompa G, et al (2002) I benefici percepibili della pet-therapy in un reparto pediatrico https://www.medicoebambino.com/?id=RIC1201_10.html. Accessed 3 Dec 2018
- 47.Svavarsdottir EK, Tryggvadottir GB, Sigurdardottir AO (2012) Knowledge translation in family nursing: does a short-term therapeutic conversation intervention benefit family of children and adolescents in a hospital setting? Findings from the Landspitali University Hospital Family Nursing Implementation Project. J Fam Nurs 18:303–327CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar