Pediatric nurse perspectives on patient- and family-centered rounds: A qualitative study.

Jennifer Baird, Genevieve Beaird, Elizabeth K Tanner, Eileen Romano, Leah Spacciante, Sonia Garcia, Jazmin Rodriguez, Andrea Loureiro, Dorna Hairston, Kristen Emodi, Carrie Finley, April E Fegley, Jayne Rogers, Sharon Cray, Lauren Destino, Brian Good, Shilpa Patel, Nancy D Spector, Christopher P Landrigan, Alisa Khan, Erin Abu-Rish Blakeney
{"title":"Pediatric nurse perspectives on patient- and family-centered rounds: A qualitative study.","authors":"Jennifer Baird, Genevieve Beaird, Elizabeth K Tanner, Eileen Romano, Leah Spacciante, Sonia Garcia, Jazmin Rodriguez, Andrea Loureiro, Dorna Hairston, Kristen Emodi, Carrie Finley, April E Fegley, Jayne Rogers, Sharon Cray, Lauren Destino, Brian Good, Shilpa Patel, Nancy D Spector, Christopher P Landrigan, Alisa Khan, Erin Abu-Rish Blakeney","doi":"10.1002/jhm.70071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient- and family-centered rounding (PFCR) models are used widely in pediatric hospitals and have been associated with better communication and fewer errors. Although model fidelity and sustainability are well-documented challenges reported by physicians and families, nurse perspectives are less known.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Our objective was to identify benefits for nurses and describe barriers and facilitators to nurse involvement in a PFCR model.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used a qualitative descriptive approach to conduct and analyze focus group data. Focus group participants were nurses from sites participating in the Patient- and Family-centered (PFC) I-PASS Safer Communication on Rounds Every Time (SCORE) study, a hybrid effectiveness implementation study of a PFCR model at 21 US pediatric hospitals.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-nine nurses from 14 study sites participated in four focus groups. We identified multiple benefits, barriers, and facilitators of nurse participation in PFC I-PASS rounds. Benefits included better communication, time savings and efficiency, conveying that nursing is a contributing part of the team. Barriers included competing demands of nurses' workload, lack of fidelity during rounds, and uncertainty about whether nurses are welcome by other care team members. Facilitators key to supporting nurse participation and engagement in rounds included clear nursing role in rounds, predictable rounding schedule and format, attending physicians fostering a welcoming environment, and strategies for when a nurse is not available.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Nurses report many benefits of PFC I-PASS rounds. Increasing and sustaining nurse participation in PFC I-PASS requires specific, nurse-informed implementation strategies targeting both structural and interprofessional aspects of rounds.</p>","PeriodicalId":94084,"journal":{"name":"Journal of hospital medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of hospital medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jhm.70071","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Patient- and family-centered rounding (PFCR) models are used widely in pediatric hospitals and have been associated with better communication and fewer errors. Although model fidelity and sustainability are well-documented challenges reported by physicians and families, nurse perspectives are less known.

Objective: Our objective was to identify benefits for nurses and describe barriers and facilitators to nurse involvement in a PFCR model.

Methods: We used a qualitative descriptive approach to conduct and analyze focus group data. Focus group participants were nurses from sites participating in the Patient- and Family-centered (PFC) I-PASS Safer Communication on Rounds Every Time (SCORE) study, a hybrid effectiveness implementation study of a PFCR model at 21 US pediatric hospitals.

Results: Twenty-nine nurses from 14 study sites participated in four focus groups. We identified multiple benefits, barriers, and facilitators of nurse participation in PFC I-PASS rounds. Benefits included better communication, time savings and efficiency, conveying that nursing is a contributing part of the team. Barriers included competing demands of nurses' workload, lack of fidelity during rounds, and uncertainty about whether nurses are welcome by other care team members. Facilitators key to supporting nurse participation and engagement in rounds included clear nursing role in rounds, predictable rounding schedule and format, attending physicians fostering a welcoming environment, and strategies for when a nurse is not available.

Conclusions: Nurses report many benefits of PFC I-PASS rounds. Increasing and sustaining nurse participation in PFC I-PASS requires specific, nurse-informed implementation strategies targeting both structural and interprofessional aspects of rounds.

儿科护士对以患者和家庭为中心的查房的看法:一项定性研究。
背景:以患者和家庭为中心的围医(PFCR)模式在儿科医院广泛使用,并与更好的沟通和更少的错误相关。尽管模型的保真度和可持续性是医生和家庭报告的有充分证据的挑战,但护士的观点却鲜为人知。目的:我们的目的是确定护士在PFCR模型中的利益,并描述护士参与的障碍和促进因素。方法:采用定性描述方法对焦点小组数据进行分析。焦点小组参与者是参加以患者和家庭为中心(PFC) I-PASS每次查房安全沟通(SCORE)研究的护士,这是一项在21家美国儿科医院进行的PFCR模型的混合效果实施研究。结果:来自14个研究地点的29名护士参加了4个焦点小组。我们确定了护士参与PFC I-PASS查房的多种好处、障碍和促进因素。好处包括更好的沟通,节省时间和效率,传达护理是团队的重要组成部分。障碍包括护士工作量的竞争需求,查房时缺乏忠诚,以及不确定护士是否受到其他护理团队成员的欢迎。辅助人员是支持护士参与查房的关键,包括明确的护理角色,可预测的查房时间表和形式,主治医生营造温馨的环境,以及护士不在时的策略。结论:护士报告了PFC I-PASS查房的许多好处。增加和维持护士对PFC I-PASS的参与需要具体的、护士知情的实施策略,针对查房的结构和跨专业方面。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信