Pressure-relieving equipment: promoting its correct use amongst nurses via differing modes of educational delivery

Aims and objectives. To examine the impact of written and verbal education on bed-making practices, in an attempt to reduce the prevalence of pressure ulcers. Background. The Department of Health has set targets for a 5% reduction per annum in the incidence of pressure ulcers. Electric profiling beds with a visco-elastic polymer mattress are a new innovation in pressure ulcer prevention; however, mattress efficacy is reduced by tightly tucking sheets around the mattress. Design. A prospective randomized pre/post-test experimental design. Methods. Ward managers at a teaching hospital were approached to participate in the study. Two researchers independently examined the tightness of the sheets around the mattresses. Wards were randomized to one of two groups. Groups A and B received written education. In addition, group B received verbal education on alternate days for one week. Beds were re-examined one month later. One researcher was blinded to the educational delivery received by the wards. Results. Twelve wards agreed to participate in the study and 245 beds were examined. Before education, 113 beds (46%) had sheets tucked correctly around the mattresses. Following education, this increased to 215 beds (87.8%) (chi(2) = 68.03, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the number of correctly made beds between the two different education groups: 100 (87.72%) beds correctly made in group A vs. 115 (87.79%) beds in group B (chi(2) = 0, P 0.987). Conclusions. Clear, concise written instruction improved practice but verbal education was not additionally beneficial. Relevance to clinical practice. Nurses are receptive to clear, concise written evidence regarding pressure ulcer prevention and incorporate this into clinical practice.

The professional voice: comparing questionnaire and telephone methods in a national survey of teachers' perceptions

This article compares the results obtained from using two different methodological approaches to elicit teachers’ views on their professional role, the key challenges and their aspirations for the future. One approach used a postal/online questionnaire, while the other used telephone interviews, posing a selection of the same questions. The research was carried out on two statistically comparable samples of teachers in England in spring 2004. Significant differences in responses were observed which seem to be attributable to the methods employed. In particular, more ‘definite’ responses were obtained in the interviews than in response to the questionnaire. This article reviews the comparative outcomes in the context of existing research and explores why the separate methods may have produced significantly different responses to the same questions.

Training pharmacists to deliver a complex information technology intervention (PINCER) using the principles of educational outreach and root cause analysis

Objective: To describe the training undertaken by pharmacists employed in a pharmacist-led information technology-based intervention study to reduce medication errors in primary care (PINCER Trial), evaluate pharmacists’ assessment of the training, and the time implications of undertaking the training. Methods: Six pharmacists received training, which included training on root cause analysis and educational outreach, to enable them to deliver the PINCER Trial intervention. This was evaluated using self-report questionnaires at the end of each training session. The time taken to complete each session was recorded. Data from the evaluation forms were entered onto a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, independently checked and the summary of results further verified. Frequencies were calculated for responses to the three-point Likert scale questions. Free-text comments from the evaluation forms and pharmacists’ diaries were analysed thematically. Key findings: All six pharmacists received 22 hours of training over five sessions. In four out of the five sessions, the pharmacists who completed an evaluation form (27 out of 30 were completed) stated they were satisfied or very satisfied with the various elements of the training package. Analysis of free-text comments and the pharmacists’ diaries showed that the principles of root cause analysis and educational outreach were viewed as useful tools to help pharmacists conduct pharmaceutical interventions in both the study and other pharmacy roles that they undertook. The opportunity to undertake role play was a valuable part of the training received. Conclusions: Findings presented in this paper suggest that providing the PINCER pharmacists with training in root cause analysis and educational outreach contributed to the successful delivery of PINCER interventions and could potentially be utilised by other pharmacists based in general practice to deliver pharmaceutical interventions to improve patient safety.