Why vital signs observations are delayed and interrupted on acute hospital wards: A multisite observational study

IF 7.5 1区 医学 Q1 NURSING International Journal of Nursing Studies Pub Date : 2025-02-09 DOI:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2025.105018
Joanna Hope , Chiara Dall'Ora , Oliver Redfern , Julie L. Darbyshire , Peter Griffiths
{"title":"Why vital signs observations are delayed and interrupted on acute hospital wards: A multisite observational study","authors":"Joanna Hope ,&nbsp;Chiara Dall'Ora ,&nbsp;Oliver Redfern ,&nbsp;Julie L. Darbyshire ,&nbsp;Peter Griffiths","doi":"10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2025.105018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Vital signs monitoring is key to identifying deteriorating hospital patients. However, adherence to monitoring protocols is limited, with observations frequently missed or delayed. Previous studies of interruptions and delays to vital signs observations have been descriptive, with none attempting to conceptualise the types of tasks that are prioritised over vital signs observations.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>This paper aims to explore how nursing teams perform vital sign observations on acute hospital wards and conceptualises which types of work delay or interrupt them.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Non-participant observational study.</div></div><div><h3>Setting(s)</h3><div>Four hospitals in the south of England.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Eligible adult wards (surgical and medical) within each hospital were randomly sampled for inclusion. Four sets of two-hour daytime observation sessions were undertaken on each ward. Two observers recorded structured and unstructured observations (open comments, field notes) on a tablet with adapted QI Tool software. We collected data over 128 h, including 715 sets of vital signs observations and 1127 interruptions. We undertook a qualitative content analysis of interruptions and delays to planned vital signs observations using both structured and unstructured observations.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We identified eight reasons why vital signs were delayed or interrupted: fixed routines, staff availability, bundled care, proximity-related activities, collaborative care, patient inaccessible or unavailable, requests for or responses to time-critical activities, or limited context available. We propose a new concept of ‘temporal status.’ Flexible care (vital signs observations, ‘bundled care’ and ‘proximity-related care’) has a low temporal status so is delayed in favour of higher temporal status activities (fixed routines and time-critical care).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Our findings could explain why vital signs taken early in the morning and evening are least likely to be postponed, as there may be fewer competing tasks with a higher temporal status at these times. Our work also challenges binary conceptualisations of interruptions as ‘beneficial’ or ‘detrimental’, recognising the complexity of nursing care decisions on a moment-by-moment basis. Our new framework suggests the lower temporal status of vital signs observations (and other flexible care) means they are delayed by higher temporal status tasks during daytime shifts in acute hospitals, regardless of their clinical priority.</div></div><div><h3>Registration</h3><div>10863045, ISRCTN (6/8/2019).</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50299,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Nursing Studies","volume":"164 ","pages":"Article 105018"},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Nursing Studies","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0020748925000276","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Vital signs monitoring is key to identifying deteriorating hospital patients. However, adherence to monitoring protocols is limited, with observations frequently missed or delayed. Previous studies of interruptions and delays to vital signs observations have been descriptive, with none attempting to conceptualise the types of tasks that are prioritised over vital signs observations.

Objective

This paper aims to explore how nursing teams perform vital sign observations on acute hospital wards and conceptualises which types of work delay or interrupt them.

Design

Non-participant observational study.

Setting(s)

Four hospitals in the south of England.

Methods

Eligible adult wards (surgical and medical) within each hospital were randomly sampled for inclusion. Four sets of two-hour daytime observation sessions were undertaken on each ward. Two observers recorded structured and unstructured observations (open comments, field notes) on a tablet with adapted QI Tool software. We collected data over 128 h, including 715 sets of vital signs observations and 1127 interruptions. We undertook a qualitative content analysis of interruptions and delays to planned vital signs observations using both structured and unstructured observations.

Results

We identified eight reasons why vital signs were delayed or interrupted: fixed routines, staff availability, bundled care, proximity-related activities, collaborative care, patient inaccessible or unavailable, requests for or responses to time-critical activities, or limited context available. We propose a new concept of ‘temporal status.’ Flexible care (vital signs observations, ‘bundled care’ and ‘proximity-related care’) has a low temporal status so is delayed in favour of higher temporal status activities (fixed routines and time-critical care).

Conclusions

Our findings could explain why vital signs taken early in the morning and evening are least likely to be postponed, as there may be fewer competing tasks with a higher temporal status at these times. Our work also challenges binary conceptualisations of interruptions as ‘beneficial’ or ‘detrimental’, recognising the complexity of nursing care decisions on a moment-by-moment basis. Our new framework suggests the lower temporal status of vital signs observations (and other flexible care) means they are delayed by higher temporal status tasks during daytime shifts in acute hospitals, regardless of their clinical priority.

Registration

10863045, ISRCTN (6/8/2019).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
15.00
自引率
2.50%
发文量
181
审稿时长
21 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Nursing Studies (IJNS) is a highly respected journal that has been publishing original peer-reviewed articles since 1963. It provides a forum for original research and scholarship about health care delivery, organisation, management, workforce, policy, and research methods relevant to nursing, midwifery, and other health related professions. The journal aims to support evidence informed policy and practice by publishing research, systematic and other scholarly reviews, critical discussion, and commentary of the highest standard. The IJNS is indexed in major databases including PubMed, Medline, Thomson Reuters - Science Citation Index, Scopus, Thomson Reuters - Social Science Citation Index, CINAHL, and the BNI (British Nursing Index).
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Effectiveness of the nurse-led multi-component BRIDGE program on maternal competence and selected post-discharge outcomes of preterm babies: A randomized controlled trial Why vital signs observations are delayed and interrupted on acute hospital wards: A multisite observational study From gift to mutilation: Exploring nursing Students' metaphorical conceptions of organ donation: A qualitative study Editorial Board
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1