Missed nursing care in a long-term rehabilitation setting: findings from a cross-sectional study.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 NURSING
Contemporary Nurse Pub Date : 2021-12-01 Epub Date: 2022-01-27 DOI:10.1080/10376178.2022.2029515
Matteo Danielis, Michela Fantini, Sonia Sbrugnera, Tiziana Colaetta, Maria Rosa Maestra, Maura Mesaglio, Alvisa Palese
{"title":"Missed nursing care in a long-term rehabilitation setting: findings from a cross-sectional study.","authors":"Matteo Danielis,&nbsp;Michela Fantini,&nbsp;Sonia Sbrugnera,&nbsp;Tiziana Colaetta,&nbsp;Maria Rosa Maestra,&nbsp;Maura Mesaglio,&nbsp;Alvisa Palese","doi":"10.1080/10376178.2022.2029515","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Background:</i> There is a growing amount of literature that links missed nursing care (MNC) to negative patient outcomes, reduced patient safety and poor quality of care. However, only few studies have investigated this phenomenon in long-term rehabilitation settings.<i>Aim:</i> To explore MNC occurrence, type, reasons and predictors in three rehabilitation units.<i>Design:</i> A cross-sectional study was performed between August and September 2017.<i>Method</i>: 95 registered nurses and nursing assistants completed section A (interventions missed) and section B (perceived reasons for MNC) of the MISSCARE Survey tool. Descriptive, bivariate and linear regression analyses were performed.<i>Findings</i>: The top missed elements were patient ambulation (score 2.4 out of 5, Standard Deviation [SD] 0.8), mouth care (2.3, SD 0.8) and participation to multidisciplinary meetings (2.3, SD 1.1). Lack of personnel was the most frequent reason reported for MNC with a score of 2.9 out of 4 (SD 0.9). At the linear regression analysis, advanced nursing education (β = 3.58, CI 95% 1.32-5.84) and inadequate handovers (β = 3.64, CI 95% 0.37-6.91) both increased the perception of MNC occurrence.<i>Conclusion:</i> MNC occurrence in rehabilitation settings appears to be lower than in other contexts; however, the most commonly missed elements are similar to those reported in other settings. As good strategies to detect the difference between expected nursing care and the one delivered to patients, advanced education and good quality handovers seem beneficial. Further research is needed to establish more evidence on predictors by developing longitudinal study designs.</p>","PeriodicalId":55633,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Nurse","volume":"57 6","pages":"407-421"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Nurse","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10376178.2022.2029515","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Background: There is a growing amount of literature that links missed nursing care (MNC) to negative patient outcomes, reduced patient safety and poor quality of care. However, only few studies have investigated this phenomenon in long-term rehabilitation settings.Aim: To explore MNC occurrence, type, reasons and predictors in three rehabilitation units.Design: A cross-sectional study was performed between August and September 2017.Method: 95 registered nurses and nursing assistants completed section A (interventions missed) and section B (perceived reasons for MNC) of the MISSCARE Survey tool. Descriptive, bivariate and linear regression analyses were performed.Findings: The top missed elements were patient ambulation (score 2.4 out of 5, Standard Deviation [SD] 0.8), mouth care (2.3, SD 0.8) and participation to multidisciplinary meetings (2.3, SD 1.1). Lack of personnel was the most frequent reason reported for MNC with a score of 2.9 out of 4 (SD 0.9). At the linear regression analysis, advanced nursing education (β = 3.58, CI 95% 1.32-5.84) and inadequate handovers (β = 3.64, CI 95% 0.37-6.91) both increased the perception of MNC occurrence.Conclusion: MNC occurrence in rehabilitation settings appears to be lower than in other contexts; however, the most commonly missed elements are similar to those reported in other settings. As good strategies to detect the difference between expected nursing care and the one delivered to patients, advanced education and good quality handovers seem beneficial. Further research is needed to establish more evidence on predictors by developing longitudinal study designs.

长期康复环境中的护理缺失:一项横断面研究的结果。
背景:越来越多的文献将错过护理(MNC)与患者的负面结果、患者安全性降低和护理质量差联系起来。然而,只有少数研究在长期康复环境中调查了这一现象。目的:探讨3个康复单位MNC的发生、类型、原因及预测因素。设计:一项横断面研究于2017年8月至9月进行。方法:95名注册护士和护理员完成MISSCARE调查工具的A部分(干预措施缺失)和B部分(MNC的感知原因)。进行了描述性、双变量和线性回归分析。结果:最容易遗漏的因素是患者的活动(得分2.4分,标准差[SD] 0.8)、口腔护理(得分2.3分,标准差[SD] 0.8)和参加多学科会议(得分2.3分,标准差[SD] 1.1)。人员缺乏是跨国公司最常见的原因,得分为2.9分(标准差为0.9)。在线性回归分析中,高级护理教育(β = 3.58, CI 95% 1.32-5.84)和不充分的交接(β = 3.64, CI 95% 0.37-6.91)均增加了跨国公司发生的认知。结论:康复环境中的MNC发生率似乎低于其他环境;然而,最常见的遗漏元素与其他设置中报告的元素相似。作为检测预期护理和提供给患者的护理之间差异的好策略,高等教育和高质量的移交似乎是有益的。需要进一步的研究来建立更多的证据,通过发展纵向研究设计的预测。
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
Contemporary Nurse
Contemporary Nurse 医学-护理
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
6.20%
发文量
38
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Contemporary Nurse is an international peer-reviewed journal designed to increase nursing skills, knowledge and communication, assist in professional development and to enhance educational standards by publishing stimulating, informative and useful articles on a range of issues influencing professional nursing research, teaching and practice. Contemporary Nurse is a forum for nursing educators, researchers and professionals who require high-quality, peer-reviewed research on emerging research fronts, perspectives and protocols, community and family health, cross-cultural research, recruitment, retention, education, training and practitioner perspectives. Contemporary Nurse publishes original research articles, reviews and discussion papers.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信