FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerJournal of Clinical Nursing

Post‐operative nursing activities to prevent wound complications in patients undergoing colorectal surgeries: A scoping review

Abstract

Aims

To identify postoperative interventions and quality improvement initiatives used to prevent wound complications in patients undergoing colorectal surgeries, the types of activities nurses undertake in these interventions/initiatives and how these activities align with nurses' scope of practice.

Design

A scoping review.

Data Sources

Three health databases were searched, and backward and forward citation searching occurred in April 2022. Research and quality improvement initiatives included focussed on adult patients undergoing colorectal surgery, from 2010 onwards. Data were extracted about study characteristics, nursing activities and outcomes. The ‘Dimensions of the scope of nursing practice’ framework was used to classify nursing activities and then the Patterns, Advances, Gaps, Evidence for practice and Research recommendations framework was used to synthesise the review findings.

Results

Thirty-seven studies were included. These studies often reported negative wound pressure therapy and surgical site infection bundle interventions/initiatives. Nurses' scope of practice was most frequently ‘Technical procedure and delegated medical care’ meaning nurses frequently acted under doctors' orders, with the most common delegated activity being dressing removal.

Conclusion

The full extent of possible interventions nurses could undertake independently in the postoperative period requires further exploration to improve wound outcomes and capitalise on nurses' professional role.

Impact Statement

Nurses' role in preventing postoperative wound complications is unclear, which may inhibit their ability to influence postoperative outcomes. In the postoperative period, nurses undertake technical activities, under doctors' orders to prevent wound infections. For practice, nurses need to upkeep and audit their technical skills. New avenues for researchers include exploration of independent activities for postoperative nurses and the outcomes of these activities.

Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care

There may be opportunities to broaden nurses' scope of practice to act more autonomously to prevent wound complication.

Reporting Method

Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist.

Patient or Public Contribution

A health consumer interpreted the data and prepared the manuscript.

Clinical deterioration as a nurse sensitive indicator in the out‐of‐hospital context: A scoping review

Abstract

Aims

To explore and summarise the literature on the concept of ‘clinical deterioration’ as a nurse-sensitive indicator of quality of care in the out-of-hospital context.

Design

The scoping review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Review and the JBI best practice guidelines for scoping reviews.

Methods

Studies focusing on clinical deterioration, errors of omission, nurse sensitive indicators and the quality of nursing and midwifery care for all categories of registered, enrolled, or licensed practice nurses and midwives in the out-of-hospital context were included regardless of methodology. Text and opinion papers were also considered. Study protocols were excluded.

Data Sources

Data bases were searched from inception to June 2022 and included CINAHL, PsychINFO, MEDLINE, The Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, EmCare, Maternity and Infant Care Database, Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet, Informit Health and Society Database, JSTOR, Nursing and Allied Health Database, RURAL, Cochrane Library and Joanna Briggs Institute.

Results

Thirty-four studies were included. Workloads, education and training opportunities, access to technology, home visits, clinical assessments and use of screening tools or guidelines impacted the ability to recognise, relay information and respond to clinical deterioration in the out-of-hospital setting.

Conclusions

Little is known about the work of nurses or midwives in out-of-hospital settings and their recognition, reaction to and relay of information about patient deterioration. The complex and subtle nature of non-acute deterioration creates challenges in defining and subsequently evaluating the role and impact of nurses in these settings.

Implications for the profession and/or patient care

Further research is needed to clarify outcome measures and nurse contribution to the care of the deteriorating patient in the out-of-hospital setting to reduce the rate of avoidable hospitalisation and articulate the contribution of nurses and midwives to patient care.

Impact

What Problem Did the Study Address?

Factors that impact a nurse's ability to recognise, relay information and respond to clinical deterioration in the out-of-hospital setting are not examined to date.

What Were the Main Findings?

A range of factors were identified that impacted a nurse's ability to recognise, relay information and respond to clinical deterioration in the out-of-hospital setting including workloads, education and training opportunities, access to technology, home visits, clinical assessments, use of screening tools or guidelines, and avoidable hospitalisation.

Where and on whom will the research have an impact?

Nurses and nursing management will benefit from understanding the factors that act as barriers and facilitators for effective recognition of, and responding to, a deteriorating patient in the out-of-hospital setting. This in turn will impact patient survival and satisfaction.

Reporting Method

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Review guidelines guided this review. The PRISMA-Scr Checklist (Tricco et al., 2018) is included as (supplementary file 1).Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.”

No Patient or Public Contribution

Not required as the Scoping Review used publicly available information.

❌