Neonatal palliative care attitude scale : development of an instrument to measure the barriers to and facilitators of palliative care in neonatal nursing

OBJECTIVE The aim of this research project was to obtain an understanding of the barriers to and facilitators of providing palliative care in neonatal nursing. This article reports the first phase of this research: to develop and administer an instrument to measure the attitudes of neonatal nurses to palliative care. METHODS The instrument developed for this research (the Neonatal Palliative Care Attitude Scale) underwent face and content validity testing with an expert panel and was pilot tested to establish temporal stability. It was then administered to a population sample of 1285 neonatal nurses in Australian NICUs, with a response rate of 50% (N 645). Exploratory factor-analysis techniques were conducted to identify scales and subscales of the instrument. RESULTS Data-reduction techniques using principal components analysis were used. Using the criteria of eigenvalues being 1, the items in the Neonatal Palliative Care Attitude Scale extracted 6 factors, which accounted for 48.1% of the variance among the items. By further examining the questions within each factor and the Cronbach’s of items loading on each factor, factors were accepted or rejected. This resulted in acceptance of 3 factors indicating the barriers to and facilitators of palliative care practice. The constructs represented by these factors indicated barriers to and facilitators of palliative care practice relating to (1) the organization in which the nurse practices, (2) the available resources to support a palliative model of care, and (3) the technological imperatives and parental demands. CONCLUSIONS The subscales identified by this analysis identified items that measured both barriers to and facilitators of palliative care practice in neonatal nursing. While establishing preliminary reliability of the instrument by using exploratory factor-analysis techniques, further testing of this instrument with different samples of neonatal nurses is necessary using a confirmatory factor-analysis approach.

Creating a therapeutic environment : a non-randomised controlled trial of a quiet time intervention for patients in acute care

Background: Noise is a significant barrier to sleep for acute care hospital patients, and sleep has been shown to be therapeutic for health, healing and recovery. Scheduled quiet time interventions to promote inpatient rest and sleep have been successfully trialled in critical care but not in acute care settings. Objectives: The study aim was to evaluate as cheduled quiet time intervention in an acute care setting. The study measured the effect of a scheduled quiet time on noise levels, inpatients’ rest and sleep behaviour, and wellbeing. The study also examined the impact of the intervention on patients’, visitors’ and health professionals’ satisfaction, and organisational functioning. Design: The study was a multi-centred non-randomised parallel group trial. Settings: The research was conducted in the acute orthopaedic wards of two major urban public hospitals in Brisbane, Australia. Participants: All patientsadmitted to the two wards in the5-month period of the study were invited to participate, withafinalsample of 299 participants recruited. This sample produced an effect size of 0.89 for an increase in the number of patients asleep during the quiet time. Methods: Demographic data were collected to enable comparison between groups. Data for noise level, sleep status, sleepiness and well being were collected using previously validated instruments: a Castle Model 824 digital sound level indicator; a three point sleep status scale; the Epworth Sleepiness Scale; and the SF12 V2 questionnaire. The staff, patient and visitor surveys on the experimental ward were adapted from published instruments. Results: Significant differences were found between the two groups in mean decibel level and numbers of patients awake and asleep. The difference in mean measured noise levels between the two environments corresponded to a ‘perceived’ difference of 2 to 1. There were significant correlations between average decibel level and number of patients awake and asleep in the experimental group, and between average decibel level and number of patients awake in the control group. Overall, patients, visitors and health professionals were satisfied with the quiet time intervention. Conclusions: The findings show that a quiet time intervention on an acute care hospital ward can affect noise level and patient sleep/wake patterns during the intervention period. The overall strongly positive response from surveys suggests that scheduled quiet time would be a positively perceived intervention with therapeutic benefit.

The STRATIFY tool and clinical judgment were poor predictors of falling in an acute hospital setting

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of the STRATIFY falls tool with nurses’ clinical judgments in predicting patient falls. Study Design and Setting: A prospective cohort study was conducted among the inpatients of an acute tertiary hospital. Participants were patients over 65 years of age admitted to any hospital unit. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) of the instrument and nurses’ clinical judgments in predicting falls were calculated. Results: Seven hundred and eighty-eight patients were screened and followed up during the study period. The fall prevalence was 9.2%. Of the 335 patients classified as being ‘‘at risk’’ for falling using the STRATIFY tool, 59 (17.6%) did sustain a fall (sensitivity50.82, specificity50.61, PPV50.18, NPV50.97). Nurses judged that 501 patients were at risk of falling and, of these, 60 (12.0%) fell (sensitivity50.84, specificity50.38, PPV50.12, NPV50.96). The STRATIFY tool correctly identified significantly more patients as either fallers or nonfallers than the nurses (P50.027). Conclusion: Considering the poor specificity and high rates of false-positive results for both the STRATIFY tool and nurses’ clinical judgments, we conclude that neither of these approaches are useful for screening of falls in acute hospital settings.