Conectar
To construct a nursing assessment framework for patients in anaesthesia recovery period.
A three-round modified Delphi method was employed to capture the consensus of 22 panellists.
The initial items in the nursing assessment framework for patients in anaesthesia recovery period were developed based on the mini-clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX). A panel of 22 experts participated in this study. The panellists have more than 10 years of experience in either clinical anaesthesia, or post-anesthesia nursing, or operating room nursing, or surgical intensive nursing. Between March and April 2023, the panellists evaluated and recommended revisions to the initial framework.
This study resulted in the development of a nursing assessment framework for patients in anaesthesia recovery period. The initial version of the framework consisted of six dimensions with 27 items. Six items were modified after the first round of consultation. After the second round, five modifications and four deletions were made based on expert opinion. The third round resulted in a convergence of expert opinion. The framework, which consists of 24 items across five dimensions, was refined. The five dimensions are as follows: History-taking, Physical assessment, Clinical judgement, Organizational efficiency and Humanistic concern.
The nursing assessment framework for patients in anaesthesia recovery period was reached consensus between the 22 experts’ opinions.
The assessment framework constructed in this study could be used for the process evaluation of post-anesthesia nursing. The framework may guide perianesthesia nurses in the timely and effective assessment of patients during this critical phase of care. It may be used for perianesthesia nursing education or to evaluate nurses' assessment skills.
The study is reported in accordance with the Guidance on Conducting and Reporting DElphi Studies (CREDES) recommendations.
No patient or public contribution.
To identify studies and the content of the interventions that have facilitated the implementation of pressure injury (PI) prevention measures in nursing home settings.
A scoping review methodology was employed. The author has carried out the following steps successively: Identified this scoping review's questions, retrieved potentially relevant studies, selected relevant studies, charted the data, summarised the results, and consulted with stakeholders from nursing homes in China.
Six electronic databases and three resources of grey literature—PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Psych INFO, Open Grey, MedNar, ProQuest Dissertations, and Theses Full Texts were searched from January 2002 through May 2022.
Forty articles were included, among which the primary interventions were quality improvement, training and education, evidence-based practice, device-assisted PI prophylaxis, nursing protocols, and clinical decision support systems. Twenty-three outcome indicators were summarised in 40 articles, which included 10 outcome indicators, seven process indicators, and six structural indicators. Furthermore, only five articles reported barriers in the process of implementing interventions.
The common interventions to promote the implementation of PI prevention measures in nursing homes are quality improvement, training, and education. Relatively limited research has been conducted on evidence-based practice, clinical decision support systems, device-assisted PI prophylaxis, and nursing protocols. In addition, there is a paucity of studies examining the impediments to implementing these measures and devising targeted solutions. Therefore, it is recommended that future studies include analysis and reporting of barriers and facilitators as part of the article to improve the sustainability of the intervention.
This article reminds nursing home managers that they should realise the importance of implementation strategies between the best evidence of PI prevention and clinical practice. Also, this review provides the types, contents, and outcome indicators of these strategies for managers of nursing homes to consider what types of interventions to implement in their organisations.
The protocol of this scoping review was published as an open-access article in June 2022 (Yang et al., 2022).
To explore the possible barriers and facilitators to implementing the Upright Positions in the Second Stage of Labour (UPSSL) programme in Chinese healthcare settings.
A mixed-method convergent design with the guidance of Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).
An online survey study and semi-structured interviews were conducted between March and May 2023. Healthcare professionals were recruited from four hospitals in Shijiazhuang, China. One hundred and thirty-one participants completed the survey study, and 23 of them were interviewed individually. Descriptive statistics evaluated the possible barriers and facilitators of implementing the UPSSL programme within the CFIR framework quantitatively. Guided by the CFIR framework, qualitative data were analysed using directed content analysis to summarize healthcare professionals' perspectives on barriers and facilitators of the UPSSL programme.
Multiple intersectional barriers and facilitators were identified from the survey and semi-interviews. Healthcare professionals believed that the UPSSL programme has a scientific evidence base, systematic contents, and possible benefits for women. However, various barriers existed at individual, system, and organizational levels. Major barriers included healthcare professionals and women's safety concerns towards the use of upright positions during childbirth, the healthcare professionals' unfamiliarity with assisting an upright position birth, poor adaptability of the programme protocol, inadequate facilities and staffing, and a lack of readiness to change in the clinical setting.
To facilitate the implementation of the UPSSL programme in China, tailored antenatal education on upright positions, especially addressing safety-related issues, should be provided to pregnant women, their families, or peers to enhance their understanding of and familiarity with such positions. Healthcare professionals should also be offered adequate training opportunities and necessary facilities. Furthermore, national-level policy changes might be required to address midwifery workforce shortages. Additionally, further research is warranted to select, adapt, and test effective implementation strategies for programme adoption.
What problem did the study address? The adoption of upright positions during the second stage of labour could promote better maternal and neonatal outcomes and a positive childbirth experience. However, the adoption of upright positions during the second stage of labour is suboptimal in healthcare settings in China. Barriers and facilitators of implementing upright positions during childbirth are unclear. What were the main findings? A range of barriers and facilitators within the CFIR framework to promote upright positions during childbirth from healthcare professionals' perspectives were identified, and the major barriers included safety concerns towards and unfamiliarity with an upright position birth, inadequate facilities and staffing, and a lack of readiness to change in the clinical setting. Where and on whom will the research have an impact? This study will enable a better understanding of the barriers and facilitators to promoting upright positions in the second stage of labour in China. The smooth and effective implementation of the UPSSL programme could help to promote better maternal and neonatal outcomes and improve women's childbirth experiences.
The reporting of this study followed the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) and Good Reporting of A Mixed Methods Study (GRAMMS) guidelines.
In this study, healthcare professionals were involved in refining the topic guides and survey questions. Additionally, findings from the interviews were returned to them for comments and corrections.
FreshRSS 