Search

Accessible Summary: What is already known?: The nurse–patient relationship in mental health care is an important focus of mental health nursing theories and research.There is limited evidence about which factors influence nurse‐sensitive patient outcomes of the nurse–patient relationship. This hinders the development, planning, delivering, and quality assurance of the nurse–patient relationship in nursing practice and nursing education. What this paper adds to existing knowledge?: To our best knowledge, this is the first study to examine associations between nurse‐sensitive patient outcomes of the nurse–patient relationship and a range of patient characteristics and relationship‐contextual factors.In this study, we found that gender, age, hospital characteristics, nurse availability when needed, nurse contact, and nurse stimulation were associated with the scores on the nurse‐sensitive patient outcome scale. What are the implications for practice?: Having insight into the factors associated with nurse‐sensitive patient outcomes of the nurse–patient relationship can help nurses, nursing students, nursing management and also patients to enhance the nurse–patient relationship, trying to influence outcomes of nursing care. Introduction: The lack of evidence on patient characteristics and relational‐contextual factors influencing nurse‐sensitive patient outcomes of a nurse–patient relationship is a possible threat to the quality and education of the nurse–patient relationship. Aim: To measure nurse‐sensitive patient outcomes of the nurse–patient relationship and to explore the associations between nurse‐sensitive patient outcomes and a range of patient characteristics and relational‐contextual factors. Method: In a multicenter cross‐sectional study, 340 inpatients from 30 units in five psychiatric hospitals completed the Mental Health Nurse‐Sensitive Patient Outcome Scale. Descriptive, univariate and Linear Mixed Model analyses were conducted. Results: Overall, patient‐reported outcomes were moderate to good. Female participants, nurse availability when needed, more nurse contact and nurse stimulation were associated with higher outcomes. Age differences were observed for some of the outcomes. Outcomes also varied across hospitals but were not related to the number of times patients were hospitalized or to their current length of stay in the hospital. Discussion: The results may help nurses to become more sensitive and responsive to factors associated with nurse‐sensitive patient outcomes of the nurse–patient relationship. Implications: The nurse‐sensitive results can support nurses in designing future nurse–patient relationships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accessible Summary: What is known on the subject?: Psychiatric and/or mental health nurses are struggling to measure the outcomes of the nurse–patient relationship.Collecting nurse‐sensitive patient outcomes is a strategy to provide outcomes of a nurse–patient relationship from patients' perspectives.Because there was no validated scale, the Mental Health Nurse‐Sensitive Patient Outcome‐Scale (six‐point Likert‐scale) was recently developed and psychometrically evaluated. What the paper adds to existing knowledge?: This is the first study using the Mental Health Nurse‐Sensitive Patient Outcome‐scale to measure nurse‐sensitive patient outcomes of the nurse–patient relationship in psychiatric hospitals. Moderate to good average scores for the MH‐NURSE‐POS total (4.42) and domains scores (≥4.09). are observed. Especially outcomes related to 'motivation' to follow and stay committed to the treatment received high average scores (≥4.60).Our results are consistent with the patient‐reported effect(s) of relation‐based nursing in qualitative research.The scores generate evidence to support the outcomes of the nurse–patient relationship and implicates that further investment in (re)defining and elaborating nurse–patient relationships in mental healthcare is meaningful and justified.More comparative patient‐reported data can determine how nurse‐sensitive patient outcomes are affected by the patient, nurse, and context. What are the implications for practice?: Demonstrating patient‐reported outcomes of the nurse–patient relationship can be important to enhance the therapeutic alliance between nurses and patients, organize responsive nursing care, and create nursing visibility in mental healthcare. Further nursing staff training on interpersonal competencies, such as self‐awareness and cultural sensitivity, can be pivotal to achieving the patient‐reported outcomes for inpatients with mental health problems. Introduction: Identifying patient‐reported outcomes of the nurse–patient relationship is a priority in inpatient mental healthcare to guide clinical decision‐making and quality improvement initiatives. Moreover, demonstrating nurse‐sensitive patient outcomes can be a strategy to avoid further erosion of the specialism of psychiatric and/or mental health nursing. Aim/Question To measure nurse‐sensitive patient outcomes of the nurse–patient relationship. Method: In a multicentred cross‐sectional study, 296 inpatients admitted to five psychiatric hospitals completed the recently developed and validated Mental Health Nurse‐Sensitive Patient Outcome‐Scale (MH‐NURSE‐POS). The MH‐NURSE‐POS consists of 21 items (six‐point Likert‐scale) in four domains: 'growth', 'expression', 'control', and 'motivation'. Results: Participants displayed moderate to good average scores for the MH‐NURSE‐POS total (4.42) and domain scores (≥4.09). Especially outcomes related to 'motivation' to follow and stay committed to the treatment received high average scores (≥4.60). Discussion The results demonstrate that patients perceive the nurse–patient relationship and the care given by psychiatric and/or mental health nurses as contributing to their treatment. Implications for Practices: Patient‐reported outcomes can guide nurses and managers to provide and organize nursing care and to build a nurse–patient relationship that has a positive impact on these outcomes. Additionally, outcomes can create nursing visibility as a profession in‐ and outside mental healthcare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study aims to follow up on the analysis of Pressure injuries (PIs) prevalence conducted between 2007 and 2014 and after the new methodological requirements for PIs surveillance establishment at the national level. A retrospective, nationwide cross‐sectional analysis of data regarding the STROBE checklist was collected by the National Health Information System (NHIS). The International Classification of Diseases (ICD‐10) diagnoses L89.0‐L89.9 for PIs were used in the period 2010–2019. A total of 264 442 records of patients with diagnoses of L89.0‐L89.9 were identified from 2010 to 2019 (26 444 patients per year on average). The numbers are increasing every year, and there is a 40% increase between 2010 and 2019. When comparing recorded PIs, the percentage of PIs occurrence in category I decreased, and the number of PIs in category IV increased in the second analysed period. Still, in absolute numbers, there is an increase across all categories. The age of patients with recorded PIs also rose slightly in the second analysed period. We have proven the PIs prevalence increase in an ageing population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Blind insertion of nasogastric (NG) tubes is performed for several reasons: nutrition and medication administration, gastric aspiration/decompression, and other, diagnostic reasons. Accidental intraesophageal and intestinal placement is common, and increases the risk of serious complications. Therefore, accurate determination of the internal length of the NG tube before placement is considered a prerequisite for achieving correct gastric positioning. Objectives We aimed to identify, assess, and summarize the evidence on the accuracy of methods for determining the internal length of an NG tube in adults. Methods Cochrane Library, Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE), PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Web of Science were searched up to 31 January, 2022. Studies were eligible when reporting data on the accuracy of methods for determining internal NG tube length in adults. Study selection, risk-of-bias assessment, and data extraction were performed independently by 2 investigators. Risk-of-bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool and the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Cross Sectional Studies. A narrative synthesis of the results was then conducted. Results Twelve articles were included in this review. All studies were observational, cross-sectional in nature, except for 1 randomized controlled trial. Ten methods for determining the internal length of an NG tube were described. Correctly positioned NG tubes ranged from 13% to 99%. Results showed that the tip of the nose–earlobe–xiphoid distance (NEX) + 10 cm (mean: 59.9–60.7 cm) and (NEX × 0.38696) + 30.37 + 6 cm (mean: 56.6–56.7 cm) could potentially result in accuracy as high as 97.4% and 99.0%, respectively. Conclusions Current data do not provide conclusive evidence of 100% accuracy in finding a correctly placed NG tube when using a method for determining the internal length. Blind placement, using any of the documented methods, cannot be considered safe without additional verification of tube tip positioning. Furthermore, using any of these 10 methods does not reduce the risk of pulmonary intubation. This systematic review was registered at https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ as CRD42021243180. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient‐centred care has been recognised as vital for today's healthcare quality. This type of care puts patients at the centre, contributing to positive patient outcomes such as patient autonomy. Empirical research comparing nurses' and patients' perceptions of the support and provision of patient‐centred care is limited and focuses solely on nurses and patients working and staying on surgical wards. Aims and objectives: Comparing patients' and nurses' perceptions of patient‐centred care on different types of hospital wards, and exploring if patient empowerment, health literacy, and certain sociodemographic and context‐related variables are associated with these perceptions. Design: Cross‐sectional design. Methods: Data were collected in ten Flemish (February–June 2016) and two Dutch (December 2014–May 2015) hospitals using the Individualised Care Scale (ICS). A linear mixed model was fitted. Data from 845 patients and 569 nurses were analysed. As the ICS was used to measure the concept of patient‐centred care, it is described using the term 'individualised care.' Results: Nurses perceived that they supported and provided individualised care more compared with patients as they scored significantly higher on the ICS compared with patients. Patients with higher empowerment scores, higher health literacy, a degree lower than bachelor, a longer hospital stay, and patients who were employed and who were admitted to Dutch hospitals scored significantly higher on some of the ICS subscales/subsections. Nurses who were older and more experienced and those working in Dutch hospitals, regional hospitals and maternity wards scored significantly higher on some of the ICS subscales/subsections. Conclusion: Nurses perceived that they supported and provided individualised care more compared with patients. Relevance to clinical practice: Creating a shared understanding towards the support and provision of individualised care should be a priority as this could generate more effective nursing care that takes into account the individuality of the patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To gain insight into which elements of the interpersonal care relationship (IPCR) are perceived as occurring (less) frequently and as (not) disturbing from the perspective of hospitalized older patients. Design A cross‐sectional study in three Belgian hospitals. Methods: A convenience sample of patients aged 75 years or older admitted to a non‐geriatric ward were recruited between May 2017 and April 2019. The Interpersonal Geriatric care relationship (InteGer) tool was used to identify elements of the IPCR and was completed by the researchers through structured patient interviews. Results: The mean total scale score for frequency was 3.74 (SD 1.51) [range 0–12]. On subscale level, the highest mean score was in the accessibility and the lowest mean score in the humanization subscale. Statistically significant differences between the hypothesized and experienced disturbance were observed in 18 of the 30 items. Ten items score in the category 'no action needed' (not occurring, not disturbing), nine items in the category 'remain attentive for patient experiences' (occurring, not disturbing), 10 items in the category 'further analyses or monitoring needed' (not occurring, disturbing) and one item in the category 'urgent action needed' (occurring and disturbing). Conclusion: Participants report mostly positive experiences related to the four subscales of the InteGer, that is, humanization, attentiveness, interest and accessibility. Insights from this study provide important opportunities in the context of care optimization for each category with the main focus on items with high experienced disturbance. Impact The InteGer can be used for monitoring IPCR and formulating action points at ward and hospital level to further improve the IPCR and quality of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this correlational, cross‐sectional study was to assess the pressure ulcer prevention attitudes of the nursing staff and to identify factors associated with it both in primary and special health care. The study was conducted with nursing staff (N = 554) working in primary and special health care units in two hospital districts in Finlandin 2018 to 2019. Attitude towards Pressure ulcer Prevention instrument was used for data collection. Demographic data, Pressure Ulcer Prevention Knowledge test, and Pressure Ulcer Prevention Practice instrument were used as background variables. Data were analysed with statistical tests. Nursing staff working in primary care (n = 327) had more positive attitudes towards pressure ulcer prevention than those in specialised care (n = 209; P =.047). Working as a wound care nurse (P =.0005), working experience after graduation (P =.0017), self‐reported pressure ulcer prevention and early detection skills (P <.0001), pressure ulcer prevention knowledge (P =.0002), and views about the realisation of their unit's pressure ulcer prevention practices (P <.0001) independently explained variation in participants' attitudes. Attention should be placed on the pressure ulcer prevention attitudes of nurses who are less experienced or less skilled and who have lower pressure ulcer prevention knowledge. Positive organisational culture towards evidence‐based pressure ulcer prevention practices should be promoted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]