121 resultados para nursing staff
Resumo:
Objectives: This study aims to determine pain frequency amongst care home residents with dementia, to investigate variables associated with pain, to explore analgesic use among residents and to seek residents' relatives' views on provision of care and management of pain by the care home. Methods: Structured face-to-face interviews were conducted with residents, nursing staff and relatives from nine dementia care homes in Northern Ireland, between May 2010 and March 2012. Demographic information was collected from participants, neuropsychiatric tests were used to assess residents' cognitive functioning, medication use was determined from care home records and residents' pain was assessed using a verbal descriptor scale. Relatives' views were sought on care provision and management of pain. Results: Forty-two residents, 16 nurses/care assistants and 35 relatives participated; the participation rate of residents was low (27.6%). Most residents were suffering moderate-severe dementia, and some residents (26.2%) were unable to provide a self-report of pain. A significantly higher proportion of relatives (57.1%) deemed residents to be experiencing pain at the time of the interview, compared with residents (23.8%, p = 0.005) and nurses/care assistants (42.9%, p = 0.035). Most residents (88.1%) were prescribed with analgesia; non-opioid analgesics were most commonly prescribed. High proportions of residents were prescribed with psychoactive medications. Antipsychotic drug use was associated with presence of pain (p = 0.046). Conclusions: This study has reinforced the challenge of assessing and managing pain in this resident population and highlighted issues to be addressed by long-term care providers and clinicians. Participation of people with dementia, and their families, in healthcare research needs to be improved.
Resumo:
Pain management for older adults in long-term care (LTC) has been recognized as a problem internationally. The purpose of this study was to explore the role of a clinical nurse specialist (CNS) and nurse practitioner (NP) as change champions during the implementation of an evidence-based pain protocol in LTC. In this exploratory, multiple-case design study, we collected data from two LTC homes in Ontario, Canada. Three data sources were used: participant observation of an NP and a CNS for 18 hours each over a 3-week period; CNS and NP diaries recording strategies, barriers, and facilitators to the implementation process; and interviews with members of the interdisciplinary team to explore perceptions about the NP and CNS role in implementing the pain protocol. Data were analyzed using thematic content analysis. The NP and CNS used a variety of effective strategies to promote pain management changes in practice including educational outreach with team members, reminders to nursing staff to highlight the pain protocol and educate about practice changes, chart audits and feedback to the nursing staff, interdisciplinary working group meetings, ad hoc meetings with nursing staff, and resident assessment using advanced skills. The CNS and NP are ideal champions to implement pain management protocols and likely other quality improvement initiatives.
Resumo:
This paper examines the debate over nursing staff to patient ratios through the lens of Marxist political economy, arguing that the owners and controllers of healthcare in the USA have a vested interest in opposing mandated minimum ratios, while those involved in carrying out nursing care have a vested interest in their implementation, which coincides with the interests of patients. We examine how evidence-based practice articulates with social power, and proceed to interrogate the research methods used to generate evidence for practice, noting that randomised controlled trials are not suitable for evaluating nurse/patient ratios, which means that observational studies are the primary source of evidence. Representatives of nursing managers have used the fact that observational studies, while demonstrating an association between high ratios and poor outcomes, have not established a causal relationship, to support their argument that there is not sufficient evidence for the imposition of mandatory ratios. We argue that the precautionary principle provides firm justification for mandatory ratios, unless and until a causal relationship has been disproved. We conclude that those involved in the generation of evidence have to choose between technical arguments about the inferiority of observational studies, or emphasising their sufficiency in triggering the precautionary principle.
Resumo:
It is widely documented that nurses experience work-related stress [Quine, L., 1998. Effects of stress in an NHS trust: a study. Nursing Standard 13 (3), 36-41; Charnley, E., 1999. Occupational stress in the newly qualified staff nurse. Nursing Standard 13 (29), 32-37; McGrath, A., Reid, N., Boore, J., 2003. Occupational stress in nursing. International Journal of Nursing Studies 40, 555-565; McVicar, A., 2003. Workplace stress in nursing: a literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing 44 (6), 633-642; Bruneau, B., Ellison, G., 2004. Palliative care stress in a UK community hospital: evaluation of a stress-reduction programme. International Journal of Palliative Nursing 10 (6), 296-304; Jenkins, R., Elliott, P., 2004. Stressors, burnout and social support: nurses in acute mental health settings. Journal of Advanced Nursing 48 (6), 622-631], with cancer nursing being identified as a particularly stressful occupation [Hinds, P.S., Sanders, C.B., Srivastava, D.K., Hickey, S., Jayawardene, D., Milligan, M., Olsen, M.S., Puckett, P., Quargnenti, A., Randall, E.A., Tyc, V., 1998. Testing the stress-response sequence model in paediatric oncology nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing 28 (5), 1146-1157; Barnard, D., Street, A., Love, A.W., 2006. Relationships between stressors, work supports and burnout among cancer nurses. Cancer Nursing 29 (4), 338-345]. Terminologies used to capture this stress are burnout [Pines, A.M., and Aronson, E., 1988. Career Burnout: Causes and Cures. Free Press, New York], compassion stress [Figley, C.R., 1995. Compassion Fatigue. Brunner/Mazel, New York], emotional contagion [Miller, K.I., Stiff, J.B., Ellis, B.H., 1988. Communication and empathy as precursors to burnout among human service workers. Communication Monographs 55 (9), 336-341] or simply the cost of caring (Figley, 1995). However, in the mental health field such as psychology and counselling, there is terminology used to captivate this impact, vicarious traumatisation. Vicarious traumatisation is a process through which the therapist's inner experience is negatively transformed through empathic engagement with client's traumatic material [Pearlman, L.A., Saakvitne, K.W., 1995a. Treating therapists with vicarious traumatization and secondary traumatic stress disorders. In: Figley, C.R. (Ed.), Compassion Fatigue: Coping with Secondary Traumatic Stress Disorder in Those Who Treat the Traumatized. Brunner/Mazel, New York, pp. 150-177]. Trauma not only affects individuals who are primarily present, but also those with whom they discuss their experience. If an individual has been traumatised as a result of a cancer diagnosis and shares this impact with oncology nurses, there could be a risk of vicarious traumatisation in this population. However, although Thompson [2003. Vicarious traumatisation: do we adequately support traumatised staff? The Journal of Cognitive Rehabilitation 24-25] suggests that vicarious traumatisation is a broad term used for workers from any profession, it has not yet been empirically determined if oncology nurses experience vicarious traumatisation. This purpose of this paper is to introduce the concept of vicarious traumatisation and argue that it should be explored in oncology nursing. The review will highlight that empirical research in vicarious traumatisation is largely limited to the mental health professions, with a strong recommendation for the need to empirically determine whether this concept exists in oncology nursing.
Resumo:
The purpose of this study was to explore nurses' perceptions of their current practices related to administering pain medications to long-term care (LTC) residents. A cross-sectional survey design was used, including both quantitative and open-ended questions. Data were collected from 165 nurses (59% response rate) at nine LTC homes in southern Ontario, Canada. The majority (85%) felt that the medication administration system was adequate to help them manage residents' pain and 98% felt comfortable administering narcotics. In deciding to administer a narcotic, nurses were influenced by pain assessments, physician orders, diagnosis, past history, effectiveness of non-narcotics and fear of making dosage miscalculations or developing addictions. Finally, most nurses stated that they trusted the physicians and pharmacists to ensure orders were safe. These findings highlight nurses' perceptions of managing pain medications in LTC and related areas where continuing education initiatives for nurses are needed.
Resumo:
The aim of this paper is to explore the role and activities of nurse practitioners (NPs) working in long-term care (LTC) to understand concepts of access to primary care for residents. Utilizing the "FIT" framework developed by Penchanksy and Thomas, we used a directed content analysis method to analyze data from a pan-Canadian study of NPs in LTC. Individual and focus group interviews were conducted at four sites in western, central and eastern regions of Canada with 143 participants, including NPs, RNs, regulated and unregulated nursing staff, allied health professionals, physicians, administrators and directors and residents and family members. Participants emphasized how the availability and accessibility of the NP had an impact on access to primary and urgent care for residents. Understanding more about how NPs affect access in Canadian LTC will be valuable for nursing practice and healthcare planning and policy and may assist other countries in planning for the introduction of NPs in LTC settings to increase access to primary care.
Resumo:
Infection control and meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in nursing homes have started to assume greater importance in practice and policy.
Resumo:
Objectives: To determine the impact of the prospective payment system (PPS) for skilled nursing facilities on the pharmacologic treatment of depression.
Methods: We used a quasi-experimental study comparing the pharmacological treatment rates for depression in the pre-PPS period (1997) to the post-PPS period (2000) in 8149 residents with documented depression living in over 500 nursing facilities in Ohio. Logistic regression models adjusting for clustering effects of residents residing in homes using generalized estimating equations provided estimates of the PPS effect on use of any antidepressant and the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). We evaluated the extent to which the PPS effect was modified by organizational characteristics, including structural characteristics, resource characteristics, and staff resources available in the homes.
Results: Overall, there was no difference in the likelihood of any antidepressant [odds ratio (OR), 1.05; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.93 to 1.18, resident-adjusted model] or an SSRI being used (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.12, resident-adjusted model) after the introduction of PPS compared with 1997 when this reimbursement system was not in place (referent group). These trends did not appear to be modified substantially by organizational characteristics.
Conclusion: Although PPS did not appear to have influenced the treatment of depression in nursing homes, systems that provide checks and balances in relation to PPS are warranted.
Resumo:
Background:
Internationally, nurse-directed protocolised-weaning has been evaluated by measuring its impact on patient outcomes. The impact on nurses’ views and perceptions has been largely ignored.
Aim:
To determine the change in intensive care nurses’ perceptions, satisfaction, knowledge and attitudes following the introduction of nurse-directed weaning. Additionally, views were obtained on how useful protocolised-weaning was to practice.
Methods:
The sample comprised nurses working in general intensive care units in three university-affiliated hospitals. Nurse-directed protocolised-weaning was implemented in one unit (intervention group); two ICUs continued with usual doctor-led practice (control group). Nurses’ perceptions, satisfaction, knowledge and attitudes were measured by self-completed questionnaires before (Phase I) and after the implementation of nurse-directed weaning (Phase II) in all units.
Results:
Response rates were 79% (n=140n=140) for Phase 1 and 62% (n=132n=132) for Phase II. Regression-based analyses showed that changes from Phase I to Phase II were not significantly different between the intervention and control groups. Sixty-nine nurses responded to both Phase I and II questionnaires. In the intervention group, these nurses scored their mean perceived level of knowledge higher in Phase II (6.39 vs 7.17, p=0.01p=0.01). In the control group, role perception (4.41 vs 4.22, p=0.01p=0.01) was lower and, perceived knowledge (6.03 vs 6.63, p=0.04p=0.04), awareness of weaning plans (6.09 vs 7.06, p=0.01p=0.01) and satisfaction with communication (5.28 vs 6.19, p=0.01p=0.01) were higher in Phase II. The intervention group found protocolised weaning useful in their practice (75%): this was scored significantly higher by junior and senior nurses than middle grade nurses (p=0.02p=0.02).
Conclusion
We conclude that nurse-directed protocolised-weaning had no effect on nurses’ views and perceptions due to the high level of satisfaction which encouraged nurses’ participation in weaning throughout. Control group changes are attributed to a ‘reactive effect’ from being study participants. Weaning protocols provide a uniform method of weaning practice and are particularly beneficial in providing safe guidance for junior staff.
Resumo:
Objectives: to evaluate the effectiveness of a policy of making hip protectors available to residents of nursing homes. Design: a cluster randomised controlled trial of the policy in nursing and residential homes, with the home as the unit of randomisation. Setting: 127 nursing and residential homes in the greater Belfast area of Northern Ireland. Participants: 40 homes in the intervention group (representing 1,366 occupied beds) and 87 homes in the control group (representing 2,751 occupied beds). Interventions: a policy of making hip protectors available free of charge to residents of nursing homes and supporting the implementation process by employing a nurse facilitator to encourage staff in the homes to promote their use, over a 72-week period. Main outcome measures: the rate of hip fractures in intervention and control homes, and the level of adherence to use of hip protectors. Results: there were 85 hip fractures in the intervention homes and 163 in the control homes. The mean fracture rate per 100 residents was 6.22 in the intervention homes and 5.92 in the control homes, giving an adjusted rate ratio for the intervention group compared to the control group of 1.05 (95% CI 0.77, 1.43, P = 0.76). Initial acceptance of the hip protectors was 37.2% (508/1,366) with adherence falling to 19.9% (272/1,366) at 72 weeks. Conclusions: making hip protectors available to residents of nursing and residential homes did not reduce the rate of hip fracture.
Resumo:
Background: despite the intensive services provided to residents of care homes, information on death rates is not routinely available for this population in the UK. Objective: to quantify mortality rates across the care home population of Northern Ireland, and assess variation by type of care home and resident characteristics. Design: a prospective, Census-based cohort study, with 5-year follow-up. Participants: all 9,072 residents of care homes for people aged 65 and over at the time of the 2001 census with a special emphasis on the 2,112 residents admitted during the year preceding census day. Measurements: age, sex, self-reported health, marital status, residence (not in care home, residential home, dual registered home, nursing home), elderly mentally infirm care provision. Results: the median survival among nursing home residents was 2.33 years (95% CI 2.25–2.59), for dual registered homes 2.75 (95% CI 2.42–3.17) and for residential homes 4.51 (95% CI 3.92–4.92) years. Age, sex and self-reported health showed weaker associations in the sicker populations in nursing homes compared to those in residential care or among the non-institutionalised. Conclusions: the high mortality in care homes indicates that places in care homes are reserved for the most severely ill and dependent. Death rates may not be an appropriate care quality measure for this population, but may serve as a useful adjunct for clinical staff and the planning of care home provision.
Resumo:
The aim of this cluster randomised controlled trial was to test the impact of an infection control education and training programme on meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) prevalence in nursing homes. Nursing homes were randomised to intervention (infection control education and training programme; N¼16) or control (usual practice continued; N¼16). Staff in intervention homes were educated and trained (0, 3 and 6 months) in the principles and implementation of good infection control practice with infection control audits conducted in all sites (0, 3, 6 and 12 months) to assess compliance with good practice. Audit scores were fed back to nursing home managers in intervention homes, together with a written report indicating where practice could be improved. Nasal swabs were taken from all consenting residents and staff at 0, 3, 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome was MRSA prevalence in residents and staff, and the secondary outcome was a change in infection control audit scores. In all, 793 residents and 338 staff were recruited at baseline. MRSA prevalence did not change during the study in residents or staff. The relative risk of a resident being colonised with MRSA in an intervention home compared with a control home at 12 months was 0.99 (95% con?dence interval: 0.69, 1.42) after adjustment for clustering. Mean infection control audit scores were signi?cantly higher in the intervention homes (82%) compared with the control homes (64%) at 12 months (P<0.0001). Consideration should be given to other approaches which may help to reduce MRSA in this setting.