护士对常规和自动化生命体征测量方法的态度。

Medical instrumentation Pub Date : 1988-10-01
N Campbell-Heider, T R Knapp
{"title":"护士对常规和自动化生命体征测量方法的态度。","authors":"N Campbell-Heider,&nbsp;T R Knapp","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The acceptance and assimilation of new medical technologies into the health-care arena is a complex process involving financial, humanistic, and clinical considerations. This experimental research compared nurses' attitudes regarding the clinical acceptability of conventional methods of measuring vital signs with their attitudes toward a new, automated method, using the IVAC Model 4000 Vital-Check. Two studies were conducted, at different university-affiliated hospitals, involving different nursing-care-delivery models. The 102 nurses who participated in the studies generally favored the automated method with respect to provider convenience, patient acceptance, and the opportunity to simultaneously perform other nursing assessments. Conventional techniques were preferred for patients on isolation precautions and in some very specific clinical situations such as those requiring detection of abnormalities in the heart rhythm. Interviews of patients were also conducted at both sites and their comments supplemented and supported the quantitative findings for the nurses. Patients seemed to adapt very well to the new technology. They were particularly interested in being better able to monitor their own measurements with the automated process.</p>","PeriodicalId":76133,"journal":{"name":"Medical instrumentation","volume":"22 5","pages":"257-62"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1988-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nurses' attitudes toward conventional and automated vital signs measurement methods.\",\"authors\":\"N Campbell-Heider,&nbsp;T R Knapp\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The acceptance and assimilation of new medical technologies into the health-care arena is a complex process involving financial, humanistic, and clinical considerations. This experimental research compared nurses' attitudes regarding the clinical acceptability of conventional methods of measuring vital signs with their attitudes toward a new, automated method, using the IVAC Model 4000 Vital-Check. Two studies were conducted, at different university-affiliated hospitals, involving different nursing-care-delivery models. The 102 nurses who participated in the studies generally favored the automated method with respect to provider convenience, patient acceptance, and the opportunity to simultaneously perform other nursing assessments. Conventional techniques were preferred for patients on isolation precautions and in some very specific clinical situations such as those requiring detection of abnormalities in the heart rhythm. Interviews of patients were also conducted at both sites and their comments supplemented and supported the quantitative findings for the nurses. Patients seemed to adapt very well to the new technology. They were particularly interested in being better able to monitor their own measurements with the automated process.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":76133,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical instrumentation\",\"volume\":\"22 5\",\"pages\":\"257-62\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1988-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical instrumentation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical instrumentation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在卫生保健领域接受和吸收新的医疗技术是一个复杂的过程,涉及财政、人文和临床方面的考虑。本实验研究比较了护士对临床可接受的常规生命体征测量方法的态度,以及他们对使用IVAC 4000型生命体征检查的新型自动化方法的态度。在不同的大学附属医院进行了两项研究,涉及不同的护理提供模式。参与研究的102名护士普遍倾向于自动化方法,考虑到提供者的便利性,患者的接受程度,以及同时进行其他护理评估的机会。对于有隔离预防措施的患者和一些非常特殊的临床情况,如需要检测心律异常的患者,首选传统技术。在两个地点对患者进行了访谈,他们的意见补充和支持了护士的定量调查结果。病人们似乎对这项新技术适应得很好。他们特别感兴趣的是能够更好地用自动化过程监控他们自己的测量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Nurses' attitudes toward conventional and automated vital signs measurement methods.

The acceptance and assimilation of new medical technologies into the health-care arena is a complex process involving financial, humanistic, and clinical considerations. This experimental research compared nurses' attitudes regarding the clinical acceptability of conventional methods of measuring vital signs with their attitudes toward a new, automated method, using the IVAC Model 4000 Vital-Check. Two studies were conducted, at different university-affiliated hospitals, involving different nursing-care-delivery models. The 102 nurses who participated in the studies generally favored the automated method with respect to provider convenience, patient acceptance, and the opportunity to simultaneously perform other nursing assessments. Conventional techniques were preferred for patients on isolation precautions and in some very specific clinical situations such as those requiring detection of abnormalities in the heart rhythm. Interviews of patients were also conducted at both sites and their comments supplemented and supported the quantitative findings for the nurses. Patients seemed to adapt very well to the new technology. They were particularly interested in being better able to monitor their own measurements with the automated process.

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
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信