急症护理护士与患者合作识别和应对患者临床状态的变化:定性研究

IF 3.8 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING Journal of Advanced Nursing Pub Date : 2024-10-19 DOI:10.1111/jan.16520
Gabrielle Burdeu, Bodil Rasmussen, Grainne Lowe, Julie Considine
{"title":"急症护理护士与患者合作识别和应对患者临床状态的变化:定性研究","authors":"Gabrielle Burdeu, Bodil Rasmussen, Grainne Lowe, Julie Considine","doi":"10.1111/jan.16520","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AimTo explore and describe acute care nurses' partnership with patients to recognise and respond to changes in patients' clinical states. Acute care nurses' decisions to partner with patients to recognise deterioration in clinical states and to respond by activating a rapid response system improves patient outcomes. Acutely unwell patients can also experience clinical changes that include improvement and deterioration that does not trigger rapid response system activation over the course of hospitalisation from illness and treatment. How acute care nurses partner with patients in response to improvement and deterioration not triggering a rapid response system is not well‐understood.DesignAn exploratory, descriptive study underpinned by Tanner's Clinical Judgement Model.MethodsUsing purposive and quota sampling, 20 nurses with direct patient care responsibilities on one medical and one surgical ward in a large Australian hospital were recruited. Nonparticipant observations followed by semistructured interviews were conducted between January and May of 2021. Nurse–patient interactions were observed for 4 h, and verbally described and recorded. Semistructured interviews were recorded and explored nurses' reasoning behind decisions observed. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse the data.ResultsThree themes were identified from the data: nurses checking in for changes; nurses forming judgements; and nurses partnering with patients to respond. Acute care nurses promoted subjective assessment based on patients' safety risks. Patients' participation in response to changes was prioritised based on acute care nurses' judgement of safety.ConclusionPatients receive significant safety benefits when acute care nurses partner with patients in response to their experience of improvement and deterioration during acute illness. Further research should evaluate the sensitivity of subjective cues in patient assessment.Implications for the Profession and Patient Care<jats:list list-type=\"bullet\"> <jats:list-item>Partnership with patients in assessment and management of improvement and deterioration improves the quality and safety of patient care.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Assessment frameworks should equally prioritise the use of objective and subjective cues.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Nursing education should promote the safety benefits of patient partnerships in responding to patient changes.</jats:list-item> </jats:list>Reporting MethodEquator checklist COREQ.Patient or Public ContributionData collected included description of patients' interactions with study participants.","PeriodicalId":54897,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Advanced Nursing","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Acute Care Nurses' Partnership With Patients to Recognise and Respond to Changes in Patients' Clinical States: A Qualitative Study\",\"authors\":\"Gabrielle Burdeu, Bodil Rasmussen, Grainne Lowe, Julie Considine\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jan.16520\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"AimTo explore and describe acute care nurses' partnership with patients to recognise and respond to changes in patients' clinical states. Acute care nurses' decisions to partner with patients to recognise deterioration in clinical states and to respond by activating a rapid response system improves patient outcomes. Acutely unwell patients can also experience clinical changes that include improvement and deterioration that does not trigger rapid response system activation over the course of hospitalisation from illness and treatment. How acute care nurses partner with patients in response to improvement and deterioration not triggering a rapid response system is not well‐understood.DesignAn exploratory, descriptive study underpinned by Tanner's Clinical Judgement Model.MethodsUsing purposive and quota sampling, 20 nurses with direct patient care responsibilities on one medical and one surgical ward in a large Australian hospital were recruited. Nonparticipant observations followed by semistructured interviews were conducted between January and May of 2021. Nurse–patient interactions were observed for 4 h, and verbally described and recorded. Semistructured interviews were recorded and explored nurses' reasoning behind decisions observed. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse the data.ResultsThree themes were identified from the data: nurses checking in for changes; nurses forming judgements; and nurses partnering with patients to respond. Acute care nurses promoted subjective assessment based on patients' safety risks. Patients' participation in response to changes was prioritised based on acute care nurses' judgement of safety.ConclusionPatients receive significant safety benefits when acute care nurses partner with patients in response to their experience of improvement and deterioration during acute illness. Further research should evaluate the sensitivity of subjective cues in patient assessment.Implications for the Profession and Patient Care<jats:list list-type=\\\"bullet\\\"> <jats:list-item>Partnership with patients in assessment and management of improvement and deterioration improves the quality and safety of patient care.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Assessment frameworks should equally prioritise the use of objective and subjective cues.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Nursing education should promote the safety benefits of patient partnerships in responding to patient changes.</jats:list-item> </jats:list>Reporting MethodEquator checklist COREQ.Patient or Public ContributionData collected included description of patients' interactions with study participants.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54897,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Advanced Nursing\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Advanced Nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.16520\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Advanced Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.16520","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

摘要

目的探讨并描述急症护理护士与患者合作识别患者临床状态变化并做出反应的情况。急症护理护士决定与患者合作,识别临床状态的恶化,并通过启动快速反应系统作出反应,从而改善患者的预后。急性病患者在住院和治疗过程中也会经历临床变化,包括病情好转和恶化,而这些变化并不会触发快速反应系统的启动。我们还不太了解急症护理护士如何与病人合作,以应对未触发快速反应系统的病情改善和恶化。方法采用目的性和配额抽样,在澳大利亚一家大型医院的一个内科病房和一个外科病房招募了 20 名负责直接护理病人的护士。在 2021 年 1 月至 5 月期间进行了非参与观察和半结构式访谈。对护士与患者之间的互动进行了长达 4 小时的观察、口头描述和记录。对半结构式访谈进行了记录,并探讨了所观察到的护士做出决定的原因。结果从数据中确定了三个主题:护士检查变化;护士形成判断;护士与患者合作应对。急诊护理护士提倡根据患者的安全风险进行主观评估。根据急症护理护士对安全的判断,患者优先参与应对变化。结论当急症护理护士与患者合作应对患者在急性病期间的病情改善和恶化体验时,患者会获得显著的安全益处。进一步的研究应评估患者评估中主观线索的敏感性。评估框架应同等优先使用客观和主观线索。护理教育应宣传与患者合作应对患者变化的安全益处。患者或公众贡献收集的数据包括患者与研究参与者互动的描述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Acute Care Nurses' Partnership With Patients to Recognise and Respond to Changes in Patients' Clinical States: A Qualitative Study
AimTo explore and describe acute care nurses' partnership with patients to recognise and respond to changes in patients' clinical states. Acute care nurses' decisions to partner with patients to recognise deterioration in clinical states and to respond by activating a rapid response system improves patient outcomes. Acutely unwell patients can also experience clinical changes that include improvement and deterioration that does not trigger rapid response system activation over the course of hospitalisation from illness and treatment. How acute care nurses partner with patients in response to improvement and deterioration not triggering a rapid response system is not well‐understood.DesignAn exploratory, descriptive study underpinned by Tanner's Clinical Judgement Model.MethodsUsing purposive and quota sampling, 20 nurses with direct patient care responsibilities on one medical and one surgical ward in a large Australian hospital were recruited. Nonparticipant observations followed by semistructured interviews were conducted between January and May of 2021. Nurse–patient interactions were observed for 4 h, and verbally described and recorded. Semistructured interviews were recorded and explored nurses' reasoning behind decisions observed. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse the data.ResultsThree themes were identified from the data: nurses checking in for changes; nurses forming judgements; and nurses partnering with patients to respond. Acute care nurses promoted subjective assessment based on patients' safety risks. Patients' participation in response to changes was prioritised based on acute care nurses' judgement of safety.ConclusionPatients receive significant safety benefits when acute care nurses partner with patients in response to their experience of improvement and deterioration during acute illness. Further research should evaluate the sensitivity of subjective cues in patient assessment.Implications for the Profession and Patient Care Partnership with patients in assessment and management of improvement and deterioration improves the quality and safety of patient care. Assessment frameworks should equally prioritise the use of objective and subjective cues. Nursing education should promote the safety benefits of patient partnerships in responding to patient changes. Reporting MethodEquator checklist COREQ.Patient or Public ContributionData collected included description of patients' interactions with study participants.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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
The Impact of Technostress, Nursing Informatics Competency and Knowledge-Sharing Behaviour on Nursing Work Performance Among Tertiary Hospital Nurses Characteristics of Nurse Managers' Conflict Management Competency. A Systematic Review. The Influence of Participation in an Intensive Care Trial on Health Practitioners' Knowledge of the Results-A Self-Reported Survey. Prognostic Factors Associated With Survival Distribution of Admission to Delayed Rapid Response Team Activation Among Deteriorating Patients: A Retrospective Study. Nurses' Perceptions of Organisational Attractiveness and Related Factors in Health Care: A Mixed Methods Systematic Review
×
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