...
首页> 外文期刊>Worldviews on evidence-based nursing / >Evaluation of patient participation in relation to the implementation of a person‐centered nursing shift handover
【24h】

Evaluation of patient participation in relation to the implementation of a person‐centered nursing shift handover

机译:评估与实施以人为本的护理轮班交接相关的患者参与情况

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Abstract Background It has been suggested that nursing shift‐to‐shift handover should be a more team‐based dialogue with and for the patient rather than about a patient. Aim The aim of this study was to evaluate patient participation in relation to the implementation of the person‐centered handover (PCH). Method A pretest–posttest design was used without a comparison group, including patients from nine units in a university hospital at pretest (n?=?228) and after implementing PCH (posttest, n?=?253) per the framework integrated‐Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services. The PCH is inspired by an Australian bedside handover model. The Patient Preferences for the Patient Participation tool was used to rate the preference for and experience of participation on 12 items, combined into three levels of preference‐based participation (insufficient–fair–sufficient). Results There were no differences regarding experience or preference‐based participation between patients at pretest–posttest; however, posttest patients experienced participation in the item Reciprocal communication to a lesser extent than the pretest patients. Only 49 of the posttest group received PCH; of those not receiving PCH, some would have wanted PCH (27), while some would have declined (24). Patients receiving PCH had sufficient participation (82), to a greater extent, regarding the item Sharing one's symptoms with staff than patients at pretest (72). Patients receiving PCH also had sufficient participation, to a greater extent, than patients at posttest who did not receive, but would have wanted PCH, regarding four items: (1) sharing one's symptoms with staff, (2) reciprocal communication, (3) being told what was done, and (4) taking part in planning. Linking evidence to action Most patients want to be present at PCH. Therefore, nurses should ask for the patients' preferences regarding PCH and act accordingly. Not inviting patients who want PCH could contribute to insufficient patient participation. Further studies are needed to capture what assistance nurses would want in identifying and acting in alignment with patient preferences.
机译:摘要背景 有人建议,护理轮班交接应该是与患者进行更基于团队的对话,而不是关于患者的对话。目的 本研究的目的是评估患者参与实施以人为本的交接 (PCH)。方法 A 前测-后测设计在没有对照组的情况下使用,包括来自大学医院 9 个病房的患者在前测 (n?=?228) 和实施 PCH 后(后测,n?=?253) 根据框架促进卫生服务研究实施行动。PCH的灵感来自澳大利亚的床边交接模型。患者参与工具的患者偏好用于对 12 个项目的偏好和参与体验进行评分,合并为三个基于偏好的参与级别(不足-公平-充分)。结果 在前测-后测时,患者在经验或基于偏好的参与方面没有差异;然而,与前测患者相比,后测患者对项目互惠交流的参与程度较小。只有 49% 的后测组接受了 PCH;在那些没有接受PCH的人中,有些人会想要PCH(27%),而有些人会拒绝(24%)。与接受 PCH 的患者 (72%) 相比,接受 PCH 的患者在更大程度上与工作人员分享症状项目有足够的参与度 (72%)。接受 PCH 的患者在更大程度上也比未接受但希望 PCH 的患者在四个方面具有足够的参与度:(1) 与工作人员分享自己的症状,(2) 相互沟通,(3) 被告知做了什么,以及 (4) 参与计划。将证据与行动联系起来 大多数患者都希望在 PCH 就诊。因此,护士应询问患者对PCH的偏好并采取相应行动。不邀请需要 PCH 的患者可能会导致患者参与不足。需要进一步的研究来了解护士在识别和行动与患者偏好保持一致方面需要什么帮助。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号