临床护士对 "用脑友好型 "同行反馈计划的看法。

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 NURSING
Journal of nursing care quality Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-08 DOI:10.1097/NCQ.0000000000000780
Kirsten Wisner, Megan Lopez
{"title":"临床护士对 \"用脑友好型 \"同行反馈计划的看法。","authors":"Kirsten Wisner, Megan Lopez","doi":"10.1097/NCQ.0000000000000780","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>While clinicians routinely observe issues with safety and quality, they may not always speak up and intervene. Peer feedback supports nurses to speak up about errors or near misses and actively improve nursing care quality. Effective peer feedback requires addressing barriers to speaking up.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this mixed methods study was to evaluate a'brain-friendly'peer feedback program´s effect on clinical nurses´ perceptions of peer review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Nurses were surveyed before and after the implementation of a peer feedback program that integrated social cognitive neuroscience principles. Open comments were analyzed using thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Responses to nearly half of survey questions improved. Thematic analysis identified institutional and personal barriers to peer feedback use, revealing the personal and social complexity of speaking up.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Social cognitive neuroscience may enhance peer feedback programs. Research using immersive qualitative methods is needed to better understand factors supporting or impeding peer feedback.</p>","PeriodicalId":16931,"journal":{"name":"Journal of nursing care quality","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical Nurses' Perceptions of a \\\"Brain-Friendly\\\" Peer Feedback Program.\",\"authors\":\"Kirsten Wisner, Megan Lopez\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/NCQ.0000000000000780\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>While clinicians routinely observe issues with safety and quality, they may not always speak up and intervene. Peer feedback supports nurses to speak up about errors or near misses and actively improve nursing care quality. Effective peer feedback requires addressing barriers to speaking up.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this mixed methods study was to evaluate a'brain-friendly'peer feedback program´s effect on clinical nurses´ perceptions of peer review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Nurses were surveyed before and after the implementation of a peer feedback program that integrated social cognitive neuroscience principles. Open comments were analyzed using thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Responses to nearly half of survey questions improved. Thematic analysis identified institutional and personal barriers to peer feedback use, revealing the personal and social complexity of speaking up.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Social cognitive neuroscience may enhance peer feedback programs. Research using immersive qualitative methods is needed to better understand factors supporting or impeding peer feedback.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16931,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of nursing care quality\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of nursing care quality\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/NCQ.0000000000000780\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of nursing care quality","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/NCQ.0000000000000780","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:虽然临床医生经常观察到安全和质量方面的问题,但他们可能并不总是会直言不讳地进行干预。同行反馈有助于护士说出错误或险情,并积极提高护理质量。目的:这项混合方法研究旨在评估 "善于动脑 "的同行反馈计划对临床护士同行评议观念的影响:在结合社会认知神经科学原理的同行反馈计划实施前后,对护士进行了调查。采用主题分析法对公开评论进行了分析:结果:对近一半调查问题的答复有所改善。主题分析确定了使用同伴反馈的制度和个人障碍,揭示了畅所欲言的个人和社会复杂性:结论:社会认知神经科学可以加强同伴反馈计划。需要使用沉浸式定性方法进行研究,以更好地了解支持或阻碍同伴反馈的因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clinical Nurses' Perceptions of a "Brain-Friendly" Peer Feedback Program.

Background: While clinicians routinely observe issues with safety and quality, they may not always speak up and intervene. Peer feedback supports nurses to speak up about errors or near misses and actively improve nursing care quality. Effective peer feedback requires addressing barriers to speaking up.

Purpose: The purpose of this mixed methods study was to evaluate a'brain-friendly'peer feedback program´s effect on clinical nurses´ perceptions of peer review.

Methods: Nurses were surveyed before and after the implementation of a peer feedback program that integrated social cognitive neuroscience principles. Open comments were analyzed using thematic analysis.

Results: Responses to nearly half of survey questions improved. Thematic analysis identified institutional and personal barriers to peer feedback use, revealing the personal and social complexity of speaking up.

Conclusions: Social cognitive neuroscience may enhance peer feedback programs. Research using immersive qualitative methods is needed to better understand factors supporting or impeding peer feedback.

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
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
90
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Nursing Care Quality (JNCQ) is a peer-reviewed journal that provides practicing nurses as well as nurses who have leadership roles in nursing care quality programs with useful information regarding the application of quality principles and concepts in the practice setting. The journal offers a forum for the scholarly discussion of “real world” implementation of quality activities.
×
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