A study of nurses' perceptions of and participation in the resolution of treatment dilemmas for critically ill newborns

This study was an exploratory investigation of variables which are associated with neonatal intensive care nurses' perceptions of and participation in life-sustaining treatment decisions for critically ill newborns. The primary purpose of the research was to examine the extent to which assessment of infants' physical and mental prognoses, parents' preferences regarding treatment, and legal consequences of non-treatment influence nurses' recommendations about life-saving treatment decisions for handicapped newborns. Secondly, the research explored the extent and nature of nurses' reported participation in the resolution of treatment dilemmas for these critically ill newborns. The framework of the study draws upon the work of Crane (1977), Blum (1980), and Pearlman (1982) who have explored the sociological context of decision-making with critical care patients.^ Participants in the study were a volunteer sample of eighty-three registered nurses who were currently working in neonatal intensive care units in five large urban hospitals in Texas. Data were collected through the use of intensive interviews and case study questionnaires. Results from the study indicate that physical and mental prognoses as well as parent preferences and concerns about legal liability are related to nurses' treatment recommendations, but their levels of significance vary according to the type of handicapping condition and whether the treatment questions are posed in terms of initiating aggressive therapy or withdrawing aggressive therapy.^ The majority of nurses reported that the extent of their participation in formal decision-making regarding handicapped newborns was fairly minimal although they provide much of the definitive data used to make decisions by physicians and parents. There was substantial evidence that nurse respondents perceive their primary role as advocates for critically ill newborns, and believe that their involvement in the resolution of treatment dilemmas should be increased. ^

SUPERFUND: AN ANALYSIS OF IMPLEMENTATION FAILURE (CERCLA, HEALTH LAW POLICY)

In December, 1980, following increasing congressional and constituent-interest in problems associated with hazardous waste, the Comprehensive Environmental Recovery, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) was passed. During its development, the legislative initiative was seriously compromised which resulted in a less exhaustive approach than was formerly sought. Still, CERCLA (Superfund) which established, among other things, authority to clean up abandoned waste dumps and to respond to emergencies caused by releases of hazardous substances was welcomed by many as an important initial law critical to the cleanup of the nation's hazardous waste. Expectations raised by passage of this bill were tragically unmet. By the end of four years, only six sites had been declared by the EPA as cleaned. Seemingly, even those determinations were liberal; of the six sites, two were identified subsequently as requiring further cleanup.^ This analysis is focused upon the implementation failure of the Superfund. In light of that focus, discussion encompasses development of linkages between flaws in the legislative language and foreclosure of chances for implementation success. Specification of such linkages is achieved through examination of the legislative initiative, identification of its flaws and characterization of attendant deficits in implementation ability. Subsequent analysis is addressed to how such legislative frailities might have been avoided and to attendant regulatory weaknesses which have contributed to implementation failure. Each of these analyses are accomplished through application of an expanded approach to the backward mapping analytic technique as presented by Elmore. Results and recommendations follow.^ Consideration is devoted to a variety of regulatory issues as well as to those pertinent to legislative and implementation analysis. Problems in assessing legal liability associated with hazardous waste management are presented, as is a detailed review of the legislative development of Superfund, and its initial implementation by Gorsuch's EPA. ^

Nurse likelihood to report a pediatric medication error: Examination of the "pre-reporting" period

Each year, hospitalized patients experience 1.5 million preventable injuries from medication errors and hospitals incur an additional $3.5 billion in cost (Aspden, Wolcott, Bootman, & Cronenwatt; (2007). It is believed that error reporting is one way to learn about factors contributing to medication errors. And yet, an estimated 50% of medication errors go unreported. This period of medication error pre-reporting, with few exceptions, is underexplored. The literature focuses on error prevention and management, but lacks a description of the period of introspection and inner struggle over whether to report an error and resulting likelihood to report. Reporting makes a nurse vulnerable to reprimand, legal liability, and even threat to licensure. For some nurses this state may invoke a disparity between a person‘s belief about him or herself as a healer and the undeniable fact of the error.^ This study explored the medication error reporting experience. Its purpose was to inform nurses, educators, organizational leaders, and policy-makers about the medication error pre-reporting period, and to contribute to a framework for further investigation. From a better understanding of factors that contribute to or detract from the likelihood of an individual to report an error, interventions can be identified to help the nurse come to a psychologically healthy resolution and help increase reporting of error in order to learn from error and reduce the possibility of future similar error.^ The research question was: "What factors contribute to a nurse's likelihood to report an error?" The specific aims of the study were to: (1) describe participant nurses' perceptions of medication error reporting; (2) describe participant explanations of the emotional, cognitive, and physical reactions to making a medication error; (3) identify pre-reporting conditions that make it less likely for a nurse to report a medication error; and (4) identify pre-reporting conditions that make it more likely for a nurse to report a medication error.^ A qualitative research study was conducted to explore the medication error experience and in particular the pre-reporting period from the perspective of the nurse. A total of 54 registered nurses from a large private free-standing not-for-profit children's hospital in the southwestern United States participated in group interviews. The results describe the experience of the nurse as well as the physical, emotional, and cognitive responses to the realization of the commission of a medication error. The results also reveal factors that make it more and less likely to report a medication error.^ It is clear from this study that upon realization that he or she has made a medication error, a nurse's foremost concern is for the safety of the patient. Fear was also described by each group of nurses. The nurses described a fear of several things including physician reaction, manager reaction, peer reaction, as well as family reaction and possible lack of trust as a result. Another universal response was the description of a struggle with guilt, shame, imperfection, blaming oneself, and questioning one's competence.^