Nursing praxis in New Zealand.

S. Neville
{"title":"Nursing praxis in New Zealand.","authors":"S. Neville","doi":"10.36951/ngpxnz","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The global burden of stroke is increasing. Many stroke survivors live with significant impairment; the care and support they and their families require is complex. Literature indicates some evidence to support the routine provision of information to stroke survivors and their families, but the best way to provide information is unclear. We undertook a mixed methods descriptive survey to ascertain information needs of stroke families through identifying current practice and resources, the appropriateness, accessibility, timeliness and information gaps. The survey, which is embedded in a longitudinal research programme titled ‘Stroke Families Whānau Programme’, was used to gain an understanding of family members’ (n=19) and practitioners’ (n=23) opinions on information provision post-stroke. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected via face-to-face interviews. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse quantitative data; content analysis was used for qualitative data. We found that for families, access to information was variable, both in quality and timeliness. Most described being overwhelmed initially with information they could not absorb; then later floundering as they had to find their own way through the maze. Few could recall information that focused specifically on them as family members. Health professionals described a range of resources and practices used to provide information. They identified barriers to effective provision of information, including language and other communication barriers, time constraints and workload issues. Most did not assess health literacy levels or consider family needs to be separate to or different from the stroke survivor’s. We concluded that access to appropriate information post-stroke was problematic for most families and was compounded by the nature of the experience; shock following the sudden onset and adjusting to changed family dynamics. Health professionals recognised the limitations of resources, time, and funding alongside the need for timely, quality education for families post-stroke, however, a gap was identified between health professionals’ theoretical understanding of best practice in information provision and their actual practice.","PeriodicalId":77298,"journal":{"name":"Nursing praxis in New Zealand inc","volume":"28 1","pages":"2-3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"34","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing praxis in New Zealand inc","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36951/ngpxnz","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 34

Abstract

The global burden of stroke is increasing. Many stroke survivors live with significant impairment; the care and support they and their families require is complex. Literature indicates some evidence to support the routine provision of information to stroke survivors and their families, but the best way to provide information is unclear. We undertook a mixed methods descriptive survey to ascertain information needs of stroke families through identifying current practice and resources, the appropriateness, accessibility, timeliness and information gaps. The survey, which is embedded in a longitudinal research programme titled ‘Stroke Families Whānau Programme’, was used to gain an understanding of family members’ (n=19) and practitioners’ (n=23) opinions on information provision post-stroke. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected via face-to-face interviews. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse quantitative data; content analysis was used for qualitative data. We found that for families, access to information was variable, both in quality and timeliness. Most described being overwhelmed initially with information they could not absorb; then later floundering as they had to find their own way through the maze. Few could recall information that focused specifically on them as family members. Health professionals described a range of resources and practices used to provide information. They identified barriers to effective provision of information, including language and other communication barriers, time constraints and workload issues. Most did not assess health literacy levels or consider family needs to be separate to or different from the stroke survivor’s. We concluded that access to appropriate information post-stroke was problematic for most families and was compounded by the nature of the experience; shock following the sudden onset and adjusting to changed family dynamics. Health professionals recognised the limitations of resources, time, and funding alongside the need for timely, quality education for families post-stroke, however, a gap was identified between health professionals’ theoretical understanding of best practice in information provision and their actual practice.
新西兰的护理实践。
全球中风负担正在增加。许多中风幸存者生活在严重的损伤中;他们及其家人需要的照顾和支持是复杂的。文献表明,一些证据支持向中风幸存者及其家属提供常规信息,但提供信息的最佳方式尚不清楚。我们进行了一项混合方法描述性调查,通过确定当前的做法和资源,适当性,可及性,及时性和信息差距来确定中风家庭的信息需求。该调查是一项名为“中风家庭Whānau计划”的纵向研究项目的一部分,旨在了解家庭成员(n=19)和从业者(n=23)对中风后信息提供的意见。通过面对面访谈收集定性和定量数据。定量数据采用描述性统计分析;定性资料采用内容分析。我们发现,对于家庭来说,获取信息的质量和及时性都是不同的。大多数人说,最初他们被无法吸收的信息淹没;然后在迷宫中挣扎着找到自己的路。很少有人能回忆起专门针对他们作为家庭成员的信息。卫生专业人员描述了用于提供信息的一系列资源和做法。他们确定了有效提供信息的障碍,包括语言和其他交流障碍、时间限制和工作量问题。大多数没有评估健康素养水平,也没有考虑到家庭需求与中风幸存者的需求是分开的或不同的。我们的结论是,对于大多数家庭来说,中风后获得适当的信息是有问题的,而且这种经历的性质使情况更加复杂;突然发作后的休克和适应变化的家庭动态。卫生专业人员认识到资源、时间和资金的局限性,以及对中风后家庭进行及时、高质量教育的必要性,然而,卫生专业人员对信息提供最佳实践的理论理解与实际实践之间存在差距。
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