Assessing the Complexity of Fundamental Care: Developing and Refining the Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING Journal of Advanced Nursing Pub Date : 2025-03-27 DOI:10.1111/jan.16919
Rebecca Feo, Tiffany Conroy, Britt Laugesen, Siri Lygum Voldbjerg, Mette Gronkjaer, Kira Jensen, Md Abdul Ahad, Jolene Thomas, Alison Kitson, Birgitte Lerbaek
{"title":"Assessing the Complexity of Fundamental Care: Developing and Refining the Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice","authors":"Rebecca Feo,&nbsp;Tiffany Conroy,&nbsp;Britt Laugesen,&nbsp;Siri Lygum Voldbjerg,&nbsp;Mette Gronkjaer,&nbsp;Kira Jensen,&nbsp;Md Abdul Ahad,&nbsp;Jolene Thomas,&nbsp;Alison Kitson,&nbsp;Birgitte Lerbaek","doi":"10.1111/jan.16919","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims</h3>\n \n <p>To describe the development and refinement of the Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice through stakeholder feedback. The tool, based on the Fundamentals of Care Framework, supports healthcare leaders and clinicians in assessing fundamental care in a practical and user-friendly manner that embraces rather than minimises the inherent complexity of this care delivery as it occurs in practice.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design</h3>\n \n <p>Multi-method study informed by participatory action principles.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Data collection involved an anonymous online survey and cognitive interviews with key stakeholders internationally to gauge perspectives on the clarity, usability, and acceptability of the tool. Data were collected between October–December 2023. Quantitative, categorical data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analysed via content analysis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Participants described the Tool as Comprehensive, Practical, and Useful. Participants liked the visual representation of results in the form of bar and radar diagrams, which aided in interpreting the outcomes. The main suggestions for improvement were: (1) Simplifying items relating to the ‘Context of Care’ dimension of the Fundamentals of Care Framework; (2) Reducing similarity between some items; (3) Separating or simplifying items with multiple components; and (4) Clarifying terminology.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Based on stakeholder feedback, the Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice is now digitised and includes a comprehensive instruction manual and definitions for each element of the Fundamentals of Care Framework assessed within the tool. The tool supports healthcare leaders and clinicians to assess fundamental care delivery at multiple levels—individual, team, unit/ward, organisational—identifying areas of strength and improvement to inform decision-making, planning, and quality improvement. The tool offers a way of assessing fundamental care holistically as a multi-dimensional construct rather than as a series of disaggregated tasks, better reflecting and capturing the complex reality of fundamental care delivery.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care</h3>\n \n <p>The Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice supports real-time feedback (i.e., immediate visualisation of results), facilitating its integration in clinical practice to support enhanced fundamental care delivery.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Impact</h3>\n \n <p>Seeking stakeholder feedback has enhanced the relevance, acceptability, and feasibility of the Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice, facilitating its use as a decision-making and planning tool to support improved fundamental care delivery across clinical settings.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Reporting Method</h3>\n \n <p>This study is reported using the CROSS and SRQR guidelines.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Patient or Public Contribution</h3>\n \n <p>No Patient or Public Contribution.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":54897,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Advanced Nursing","volume":"81 12","pages":"8972-8989"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jan.16919","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Advanced Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jan.16919","RegionNum":3,"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

Aims

To describe the development and refinement of the Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice through stakeholder feedback. The tool, based on the Fundamentals of Care Framework, supports healthcare leaders and clinicians in assessing fundamental care in a practical and user-friendly manner that embraces rather than minimises the inherent complexity of this care delivery as it occurs in practice.

Design

Multi-method study informed by participatory action principles.

Methods

Data collection involved an anonymous online survey and cognitive interviews with key stakeholders internationally to gauge perspectives on the clarity, usability, and acceptability of the tool. Data were collected between October–December 2023. Quantitative, categorical data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analysed via content analysis.

Results

Participants described the Tool as Comprehensive, Practical, and Useful. Participants liked the visual representation of results in the form of bar and radar diagrams, which aided in interpreting the outcomes. The main suggestions for improvement were: (1) Simplifying items relating to the ‘Context of Care’ dimension of the Fundamentals of Care Framework; (2) Reducing similarity between some items; (3) Separating or simplifying items with multiple components; and (4) Clarifying terminology.

Conclusion

Based on stakeholder feedback, the Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice is now digitised and includes a comprehensive instruction manual and definitions for each element of the Fundamentals of Care Framework assessed within the tool. The tool supports healthcare leaders and clinicians to assess fundamental care delivery at multiple levels—individual, team, unit/ward, organisational—identifying areas of strength and improvement to inform decision-making, planning, and quality improvement. The tool offers a way of assessing fundamental care holistically as a multi-dimensional construct rather than as a series of disaggregated tasks, better reflecting and capturing the complex reality of fundamental care delivery.

Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care

The Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice supports real-time feedback (i.e., immediate visualisation of results), facilitating its integration in clinical practice to support enhanced fundamental care delivery.

Impact

Seeking stakeholder feedback has enhanced the relevance, acceptability, and feasibility of the Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice, facilitating its use as a decision-making and planning tool to support improved fundamental care delivery across clinical settings.

Reporting Method

This study is reported using the CROSS and SRQR guidelines.

Patient or Public Contribution

No Patient or Public Contribution.

Abstract Image

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
评估基础护理的复杂性:开发和完善弗林德斯基础护理评估工具的临床实践
通过利益相关者反馈,描述弗林德斯基础护理评估工具在临床实践中的发展和完善。该工具基于护理基础框架,支持医疗保健领导者和临床医生以实用和用户友好的方式评估基本护理,包括而不是最小化这种护理交付在实践中发生的固有复杂性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
7.90%
发文量
369
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Advanced Nursing (JAN) contributes to the advancement of evidence-based nursing, midwifery and healthcare by disseminating high quality research and scholarship of contemporary relevance and with potential to advance knowledge for practice, education, management or policy. All JAN papers are required to have a sound scientific, evidential, theoretical or philosophical base and to be critical, questioning and scholarly in approach. As an international journal, JAN promotes diversity of research and scholarship in terms of culture, paradigm and healthcare context. For JAN’s worldwide readership, authors are expected to make clear the wider international relevance of their work and to demonstrate sensitivity to cultural considerations and differences.
期刊最新文献
Scope of Nursing Work and Models of Service Delivery in Australian Primary and Secondary Schools: A Scoping Review Advance Care Planning Intention and Associated Factors Among People With Dementia: A Mixed-Methods Study. Delayed Admission to the Intensive Care Unit Is Associated With Increased Mortality Risk in Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study. Experiences and Responses to Cancer-Related Anorexia Across Patients, Caregivers and Healthcare Professionals: A Qualitative Meta-Synthesis. Disabled Nurses in an Ableist Profession: Lessons From the Past and Directions for the Future.
×
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:604180095
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