Teach-back: A systematic review of implementation and impacts

Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

Standard

Teach-back : A systematic review of implementation and impacts. / Talevski, Jason; Shee, Anna Wong; Rasmussen, Bodil; Kemp, Georgie; Beauchamp, Alison.

In: PLoS ONE, Vol. 15, No. 4, 0231350, 2020.

Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Talevski, J, Shee, AW, Rasmussen, B, Kemp, G & Beauchamp, A 2020, 'Teach-back: A systematic review of implementation and impacts', PLoS ONE, vol. 15, no. 4, 0231350. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231350

APA

Talevski, J., Shee, A. W., Rasmussen, B., Kemp, G., & Beauchamp, A. (2020). Teach-back: A systematic review of implementation and impacts. PLoS ONE, 15(4), [0231350]. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231350

Vancouver

Talevski J, Shee AW, Rasmussen B, Kemp G, Beauchamp A. Teach-back: A systematic review of implementation and impacts. PLoS ONE. 2020;15(4). 0231350. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231350

Author

Talevski, Jason ; Shee, Anna Wong ; Rasmussen, Bodil ; Kemp, Georgie ; Beauchamp, Alison. / Teach-back : A systematic review of implementation and impacts. In: PLoS ONE. 2020 ; Vol. 15, No. 4.

Bibtex

@article{e594b677d9214b079b8730711e66529a,
title = "Teach-back: A systematic review of implementation and impacts",
abstract = "Patients often have difficulty comprehending or recalling information given to them by their healthcare providers. Use of 'teach-back' has been shown to improve patients' knowledge and self-care abilities, however there is little guidance for healthcare services seeking to embed teach-back in their setting. This review aims to synthesize evidence about the translation of teach-back into practice including mode of delivery, use of implementation strategies and effectiveness. We searched Ovid Medline, CINAHL, Embase and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies reporting the use of teach-back as an educational intervention, published up to July 2019. Two reviewers independently extracted study data and assessed methodologic quality. Implementation strategies were extracted into distinct categories established in the Implementation Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project. Overall, 20 studies of moderate quality were included in this review (four rated high, nine rated moderate, seven rated weak). Studies were heterogeneous in terms of setting, population and outcomes. In most studies (n = 15), teach-back was delivered as part of a simple and structured educational approach. Implementation strategies were infrequently reported (n = 10 studies). The most used implementation strategies were training and education of stakeholders (n = 8), support for clinicians (n = 6) and use of audits and provider feedback (n = 4). Use of teach-back proved effective in 19 of the 20 studies, ranging from learning-related outcomes (e.g. knowledge recall and retention) to objective health-related outcomes (e.g. hospital re-admissions, quality of life). Teach-back was found to be effective across a wide range of settings, populations and outcome measures. While its mode of delivery is well-defined, strategies to support its translation into practice are not often described. Use of implementation strategies such as training and education of stakeholders and supporting clinicians during implementation may improve the uptake and sustainability of teach-back and achieve positive outcomes.",
keywords = "HEALTH LITERACY, HEART-FAILURE, EDUCATIONAL INTERVENTIONS, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION, CONTROLLED-TRIAL, COMMUNICATION, CARE, MANAGEMENT, NURSES, PHYSICIANS",
author = "Jason Talevski and Shee, {Anna Wong} and Bodil Rasmussen and Georgie Kemp and Alison Beauchamp",
year = "2020",
doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0231350",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
journal = "PLoS ONE",
issn = "1932-6203",
publisher = "Public Library of Science",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Teach-back

T2 - A systematic review of implementation and impacts

AU - Talevski, Jason

AU - Shee, Anna Wong

AU - Rasmussen, Bodil

AU - Kemp, Georgie

AU - Beauchamp, Alison

PY - 2020

Y1 - 2020

N2 - Patients often have difficulty comprehending or recalling information given to them by their healthcare providers. Use of 'teach-back' has been shown to improve patients' knowledge and self-care abilities, however there is little guidance for healthcare services seeking to embed teach-back in their setting. This review aims to synthesize evidence about the translation of teach-back into practice including mode of delivery, use of implementation strategies and effectiveness. We searched Ovid Medline, CINAHL, Embase and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies reporting the use of teach-back as an educational intervention, published up to July 2019. Two reviewers independently extracted study data and assessed methodologic quality. Implementation strategies were extracted into distinct categories established in the Implementation Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project. Overall, 20 studies of moderate quality were included in this review (four rated high, nine rated moderate, seven rated weak). Studies were heterogeneous in terms of setting, population and outcomes. In most studies (n = 15), teach-back was delivered as part of a simple and structured educational approach. Implementation strategies were infrequently reported (n = 10 studies). The most used implementation strategies were training and education of stakeholders (n = 8), support for clinicians (n = 6) and use of audits and provider feedback (n = 4). Use of teach-back proved effective in 19 of the 20 studies, ranging from learning-related outcomes (e.g. knowledge recall and retention) to objective health-related outcomes (e.g. hospital re-admissions, quality of life). Teach-back was found to be effective across a wide range of settings, populations and outcome measures. While its mode of delivery is well-defined, strategies to support its translation into practice are not often described. Use of implementation strategies such as training and education of stakeholders and supporting clinicians during implementation may improve the uptake and sustainability of teach-back and achieve positive outcomes.

AB - Patients often have difficulty comprehending or recalling information given to them by their healthcare providers. Use of 'teach-back' has been shown to improve patients' knowledge and self-care abilities, however there is little guidance for healthcare services seeking to embed teach-back in their setting. This review aims to synthesize evidence about the translation of teach-back into practice including mode of delivery, use of implementation strategies and effectiveness. We searched Ovid Medline, CINAHL, Embase and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies reporting the use of teach-back as an educational intervention, published up to July 2019. Two reviewers independently extracted study data and assessed methodologic quality. Implementation strategies were extracted into distinct categories established in the Implementation Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project. Overall, 20 studies of moderate quality were included in this review (four rated high, nine rated moderate, seven rated weak). Studies were heterogeneous in terms of setting, population and outcomes. In most studies (n = 15), teach-back was delivered as part of a simple and structured educational approach. Implementation strategies were infrequently reported (n = 10 studies). The most used implementation strategies were training and education of stakeholders (n = 8), support for clinicians (n = 6) and use of audits and provider feedback (n = 4). Use of teach-back proved effective in 19 of the 20 studies, ranging from learning-related outcomes (e.g. knowledge recall and retention) to objective health-related outcomes (e.g. hospital re-admissions, quality of life). Teach-back was found to be effective across a wide range of settings, populations and outcome measures. While its mode of delivery is well-defined, strategies to support its translation into practice are not often described. Use of implementation strategies such as training and education of stakeholders and supporting clinicians during implementation may improve the uptake and sustainability of teach-back and achieve positive outcomes.

KW - HEALTH LITERACY

KW - HEART-FAILURE

KW - EDUCATIONAL INTERVENTIONS

KW - AMERICAN ASSOCIATION

KW - CONTROLLED-TRIAL

KW - COMMUNICATION

KW - CARE

KW - MANAGEMENT

KW - NURSES

KW - PHYSICIANS

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0231350

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0231350

M3 - Review

C2 - 32287296

VL - 15

JO - PLoS ONE

JF - PLoS ONE

SN - 1932-6203

IS - 4

M1 - 0231350

ER -

ID: 271621468