Search

Background: Historically, it has been reported that new graduates make limited use of their clinical assessment skills, yet these form the basis for making nursing decisions and selecting all nursing interventions. Aims and objectives: To explore new graduates' preparedness for, and confidence with, clinical assessment and their reliance on electronic monitoring. To identify barriers that hinder, and strategies that enable, clinical assessment. Design: A mixed‐method study comprising a cross‐sectional, quantitative survey and qualitative data, gathered using the World Café method. Methods: Data were collected from volunteers (n = 137) of all new graduates (n = 160) working in adult settings for a New Zealand district health board over a 1‐year period. A paper‐based survey explored use of clinical assessment, using a five‐point Likert scale. Qualitative data comprised written records of group discussions and individual responses to four questions with thematic analysis of results. A STROBE checklist was used. Results: Most (n = 128) new graduates agreed/strongly agreed that clinical assessment was part of their role. Most (n = 119) agreed/strongly agreed that assessing patients by technology alone was inadequate. Thirty‐six did not agree/strongly agree that they were well‐prepared to perform clinical assessment. Forty‐one did not agree/strongly agree that they were confident to perform clinical assessment, particularly those aged ≥30 years. Factors limiting use of clinical assessment were lack of time, knowledge, skill, confidence, reliance on doctors and an unsupportive work environment. Factors that would enhance clinical assessment involved increased supervision by experienced staff, provision of short courses and more in‐service education on clinical assessment. Conclusions: New graduates acknowledged that clinical assessment was part of their role and involved more than electronic monitoring. However, many lacked confidence and preparedness for clinical assessment in their work area, particularly those aged ≥30 years, potentially limiting clinical assessment use. Supportive changes, including short courses to revise clinical assessment skills and supervision of workplace‐specific clinical assessments, could help new graduates more confidently and efficiently assimilate clinical assessment into their practice. Relevance to Clinical Practice: This research identified reasons that caused a cohort of new graduates to make limited use of their clinical assessment skills. It also reports the practical solutions they considered would help them increase their use of clinical assessment and thus support their decision‐making in nursing practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accessible summary: What is known on the subject?: Contemporary mental health policy stipulates consumer participation in all aspects of mental health services including service evaluation and other forms of mental health research.Research is identified as underpinning quality mental health services, and therefore, consumers researchers could enhance the mental health sector by contributing to the quality, credibility and relevance of mental health research. What this paper adds to existing knowledge?: Non‐consumer researchers generally supported the concept of a consumer expert reference group for researchers at the individual and institutional level.A consumer expert reference group should reflect diversity and offer expertise relevant to the topic of research and may represent one way to normalize partnerships with consumer researchers and realize the benefits they can bring to research. What are the implications for practice?: Quality mental health services are underpinned by robust research evidence. It is crucial that consumers are active participants in research activity.The availability of a consumer expert reference group could facilitate collaborations between consumer and non‐consumer researchers and contribute to a stronger consumer focus embedded in mental health research. Introduction: Contemporary mental health policy identifies consumers as active participants in all aspects of mental health services from design to evaluation. Consumer researchers should be actively involved in mental health research and contribute to quality service delivery. Aim: To gain a snapshot of mental health researcher views on strategies for increasing research by or with consumers in mental health through the establishment of an Expert Consumer Researcher Group (ECRG). Methods: Cross‐sectional survey of 41 non‐consumer mental health researchers from Australia or New Zealand. Results: The introduction of an ECRG was considered an effective strategy for linking consumer and non‐consumer researchers and providing specialist advice on research design and methodology. The most suitable location for this group was identified as within consumer advocacy agencies (71%), universities (66%) or research funding bodies (66%). Participants rated their likelihood of seeking advice from the ECRG as high. Discussion: Research participants supported the value of an ECRG. They emphasized the importance of ensuring the group reflected a diversity of views and offered specialized expertise related to the specific topic. The ECRG could benefit both individual researchers and larger research organizations. Implications for practice: An ECRG could facilitate collaborations with consumer researchers and in turn enhance the quality of mental health research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: This study aimed to identify behaviours and cues that nurses recognise as indications of unsafe practice, perceived factors that contribute to unsafe practice and actions nurses take in response. Design: Cross‐sectional survey. Methods: National cross‐sectional survey of a random sample of registered nurses (n = 231) in New Zealand, in 2017–2018. The STROBE Checklist was used to report this study. Results: Nurses reported a high rate of episodes of unsafe practices and recognised a range of behaviours and cues that alerted them to the potential for unsafe practice. Several organisational issues were perceived to contribute to unsafe practice occurring. The reporting of episodes of unsafe practice and perceived organisational support was low for nurses compared with managers. Conclusion: Failure to recognise and respond to unsafe practice may indicate a tolerance for substandard practice by individual nurses, or by the organisation. Nurses who recognise unsafe practice must be supported by the organisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]