Search

Aim: To review the evidence on the effects/impact of electronic nursing documentation interventions on promoting or improving quality care and/or patient safety in acute hospital settings. Background: Electronic documentation has been recommended to improve quality care and patient safety. With the gradual move from paper‐based to electronic nursing documentation internationally, there is a need to identify interventions that can effectively improve quality care and patient safety. Evaluation: We conducted a systematic review on the effectiveness of electronic nursing documentation interventions on promoting or improving quality care and/or patient safety in acute hospital settings. Key Issues: Six articles reporting on six individual studies met all eligibility criteria. They were uncontrolled pre/post intervention studies reporting positive impacts on at least one or more outcomes. Most outcomes related to documentation practice and documentation of content. Conclusion: Some evidence from our review indicates that implementing electronic nursing documentation in acute hospital settings is time saving, reduces rates of documentation errors, falls and infections. Implications for Nursing Management: A planned approach from management over time to allow nurses adapt to new electronic systems of documentation would seem a good investment in terms of efficiency of work time, possibly resulting in more time for clinical care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The aim of this study is to report the development and psychometric testing of the clinical leadership needs analysis instrument (CLeeNA). Background: Limited emphasis is placed on the clinical leadership needs of nurses and midwives that are fundamental to supporting the delivery of high quality, safe patient care. Methods: A development and validation study of CLeeNA was undertaken using cross‐sectional data. A sample of 324 registered nurses and midwives completed the questionnaire using a 7‐point adjectival scale. Principal component analysis was conducted to explore scale grouping of items (n = 103 items). Results: Principal component analysis, item reduction and parallel analysis on the items of the instrument resulted in seven factors consisting of 56 items. These factors were identified as: Staff and Care Delivery; Technology and Care Initiatives; Self and Team Development; Standards of Care; Financial and Service Management; Leadership and Clinical Practice; Patient Safety and Risk Management. Conclusion: The identified factors are reflective of an ever‐changing health care environment. Implications for Nursing Management: Potentially, after further testing, this instrument could be used by nursing management and educators to measure clinical leadership needs, inform the design of clinical leadership training programmes and provide valuable information about health care leadership development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]