Search

Aim: To gain staff feedback on the implementation and impact of a novel ambulatory monitoring system to support coronavirus patient management on an isolation ward. Design: Qualitative service evaluation. Methods: Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with 15 multidisciplinary isolation ward staff in the United Kingdom between July 2020 and May 2021. Interviews were audio‐recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Findings: Adopting Innovation to Assist Patient Safety was identified as the overriding theme. Three interlinked sub‐themes represent facets of how the system supported patient safety. Patient Selection was developed throughout the pandemic, as clinical staff became more confident in choosing which patients would benefit most. Trust In the System described how nurses coped with discrepancies between the ambulatory system and ward observation machines. Finally, Resource Management examined how, once trust was built, staff perceived the ambulatory system assisted with caseload management. This supported efficient personal protective equipment resource use by reducing the number of isolation room entries. Despite these reported benefits, face‐to‐face contact was still highly valued, despite the risk of coronavirus exposure. Conclusion: Hospital wards should consider using ambulatory monitoring systems to support caseload management and patient safety. Patients in isolation rooms or at high risk of deterioration may particularly benefit from this additional monitoring. However, these systems should be seen as an adjunct to nursing care, not a replacement. Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care: Nurses valued ambulatory monitoring as a means of ensuring the safety of patients at risk of deterioration and prioritizing their workload. Impact: The findings of this research will be useful to all those developing or considering implementation of ambulatory monitoring systems in hospital wards. Reporting Method: This manuscript follows the Consolidated criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) guidelines with inclusion of relevant SQUIRE guidelines for reporting quality improvement. Patient or Public Contribution: No Patient or Public Contribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To generate, test and refine programme theories that emerged from a rapid realist review investigating practising UK Nurses' and Midwives' experiences of effective leadership strategies during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Background: The realist review of literature generated six tentative theories of healthful leadership practices reflecting, working with people's beliefs and values; being facilitative; multiple means of communication and; practical support. The review yielded little insight into the actual impact of the leadership approaches advocated. Methods: A realist study, informed by person‐centredness using mixed‐methods. Online survey (n = 328) and semi‐structured interviews (n = 14) of nurses and midwives across the UK in different career positions/specialities. Quantitative data analysed using descriptive statistics and exploratory factor analysis. Framework analysis for qualitative data using context (C), mechanism (M), outcome (O) configurations of the tentative theories. Results: Three refined theories were identified concerning: Visibility and availability; embodying values and; knowing self. Healthful leadership practices are only achievable within organisational cultures that privilege well‐being. Conclusions: Leaders should intentionally adopt practices that promote well‐being. 'Knowing self' as a leader, coaching and mentoring practice development is important for leadership development. Implications for Clinical Practice: Nurses who feel valued, heard, cared for and safe are more likely to remain in clinical practice. Job satisfaction and being motivated to practice with confidence and competence will impact positively on patient outcomes. Impact: The study addresses the role of leadership in developing healthful workplace cultures. The main findings were six leadership practices that promote healthful cultures. The research will have an impact on strategic and clinical leaders, nurses and midwives. Reporting Method: This study used EQUATOR checklist, RAMASES II as reporting standards for realist evaluations. Patient or Public Contribution: No patient or public contribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and Objectives: To explore the experiences of nursing students in England who had worked through the first wave and transitioned to qualification in the ongoing pandemic. Background: Experiences of health professionals and student nurses during the pandemic are now well documented, but the transition of students to qualification is less well understood. In Summer 2020, we interviewed 16 student nurses who had worked as health care assistants on paid extended placements as part of the COVID‐19 response in the East of England, finding surprisingly positive experiences, including perceived heightened preparedness for qualification. A year later, we re‐interviewed 12 participants from the original study to hear about transitioning to qualification during the ongoing pandemic. This study provides novel insights into their experiences. Design: A qualitative study design was used. Methods: Twelve newly qualified nurses who had participated in the original study took part in qualitative, online interviews where they shared their experiences of working and transitioning to qualification during the ongoing pandemic since we spoke to them a year earlier. The data was analysed using thematic analysis. COREQ guidelines were used in developing and reporting this study. Results: Three themes were identified. Constant change: in the clinical environment and arising out of the transition to newly qualified nurse, mental health and well‐being and reflecting on the past to learn for the future. Conclusions: Participants experienced a unique transition to qualification. The perceived heightened preparedness for qualification that participants who had worked as students during the first wave of the pandemic had become a reality, ameliorating some of the known effects of transition. However, increased expectations and added responsibilities in extremely busy, fluctuating clinical environments with minimal support add weight to calls for mandatory preceptorship programmes. While heightened resilience was evident, provision of ongoing mental health and well‐being support is strongly recommended. Relevance to Clinical Practice: We need a partnership approach with nurse educators and practice colleagues which ensures preparation for qualified practice is appropriate. If we do not effectively prepare students for qualified nurse posts, patient care will almost certainly be compromised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To understand the experience of critical care nurses during the COVID‐19 pandemic, through the application of the Job‐Demand‐Resource model of occupational stress. Design: Qualitative interview study. Methods: Twenty‐eight critical care nurses (CCN) working in ICU in the UK NHS during the COVID‐19 pandemic took part in semi‐structured interviews between May 2021 and May 2022. Interviews were guided by the constructs of the Job‐Demand Resource model. Data were analysed using framework analysis. Results: The most difficult job demands were the pace and amount, complexity, physical and emotional effort of their work. Prolonged high demands led to CCN experiencing emotional and physical exhaustion, burnout, post‐traumatic stress symptoms and impaired sleep. Support from colleagues and supervisors was a core job resource. Sustained demands and impaired physical and psychological well‐being had negative organizational consequences with CCN expressing increased intention to leave their role. Conclusions: The combination of high demands and reduced resources had negative impacts on the psychological well‐being of nurses which is translating into increased consideration of leaving their profession. Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care: The full impacts of the pandemic on the mental health of CCN are unlikely to resolve without appropriate interventions. Impact: Managers of healthcare systems should use these findings to inform: (i) the structure and organization of critical care workplaces so that they support staff to be well, and (ii) supportive interventions for staff who are carrying significant psychological distress as a result of working during and after the pandemic. These changes are required to improve staff recruitment and retention. Reporting Method: We used the COREQ guidelines for reporting qualitative studies. Patient and Public Contribution: Six CCN provided input to survey content and interview schedule. Two authors and members of the study team (T.S. and S.C.) worked in critical care during the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]