Search

Aim: To gain a deeper understanding of what is important to nurses when thinking about shift patterns and the organisation of working time. Design: A cross‐sectional survey of nursing staff working across the UK and Ireland collected quantitative and qualitative responses. Methods: We recruited from two National Health Service Trusts and through an open call via trade union membership, online/print nursing profession magazines and social media. Worked versus preferred shift length/pattern, satisfaction and choice over shift patterns and nurses' views on aspects related to work and life (when working short, long, rotating shifts) were analysed with comparisons of proportions of agreement and crosstabulation. Qualitative responses on important factors related to shift preferences were analysed with inductive thematic analysis. Results: Eight hundred and seventy‐three survey responses were collected. When nurses worked long shifts and rotating shifts, lower proportions reported being satisfied with their shifts and working their preferred shift length and pattern. Limited advantages were realised when comparing different shift types; however, respondents more frequently associated 'low travel costs' and 'better ability to do paid overtime' with long shifts and 'healthy diet/exercise' with short shifts; aspects related to rotating shifts often had the lowest proportions of agreement. In the qualitative analysis, three themes were developed: 'When I want to work', 'Impacts to my life outside work' and 'Improving my work environment'. Reasons for nurses' shift preferences were frequently related to nurses' priorities outside of work, highlighting the importance of organising schedules that support a good work‐life balance. Relevance to Clinical Practice: General scheduling practices like adhering to existing shift work guidelines, using consistent and predictable shift patterns and facilitating flexibility over working time were identified by nurses as enablers for their preferences and priorities. These practices warrant meaningful consideration when establishing safe and efficient nurse rosters. Patient or Public Contribution: This survey was developed and tested with a diverse group of stakeholders, including nursing staff, patients, union leads and ward managers. Reporting Method: The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies (STROBE) checklist for cross‐sectional studies was used to guide reporting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and objectives: Surveillance of wound infection including signs of infection alongside antimicrobial usage (types, duration, frequency) can highlight knowledge gaps and inconsistencies. This manuscript aims to highlight these, identify and inform opportunities for practice improvement and to show impact of infection management practice may be having on the issue of antimicrobial resistance. Background: Infected wounds pose challenges to healthcare professionals. Balancing risk of wound deterioration and progression to systemic infection with appropriate use of antimicrobials is necessary to minimise development of resistance. Methods: Analysis consisted of a practice survey of 9661 wounds across 70 community sites over a period of one week. Data were collected from projects between 2017 and 2020. The form was available to providers within the UK, Ireland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Finland. EQUATOR research guidelines were followed; STROBE checklist for observational research reporting was completed. Results: Infection rates of 8.9% were reported from wounds assessed. These data indicate inconsistencies with diagnosis across practice with non‐specialists more likely to be unsure of wound infection. Greater confidence in infection identification was observed as number of signs increased. Inconsistencies were also observed in appropriate treatment; antimicrobials were used in 35% of wounds considered not infected and not used in 41% of wounds that were identified as infected. Conclusions: This investigation of infection management practice of over 9000 wounds provides an insight into diagnosis and treatment of infection. Inconsistencies in diagnosis and treatment of wound infections reported highlight the need for increased education, awareness of diagnosis and treatment of infection. Relevance to clinical practice: Variability in management of infected wounds highlights opportunities to aid more effective diagnosis and treatment of infected wounds. Incorporation of support tools or evidence‐based pathways into practice may enhance confidence in management of local infection, balanced with appropriate use, potentially minimising resistance and improving outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]