Search

Copyright of Journal of Advanced Nursing (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.) is the property of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Efforts to address the complex global problem of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) highlight the need for imagination and innovation. However, nursing has not yet leveraged its potential to innovate to prevent AMR advancing. Aims: This paper focuses on the initial phase of an ongoing research and development study that seeks to foster nursing imagination and innovation by enhancing the meaningfulness of AMR for practising nurses and by facilitating their creative ideas. Methods: This aim is addressed through application of arts and humanities approaches, in particular the use of visualisation, co-design and historical methods, underpinned by the Design Council Double Diamond process model. The first phase with 20 UK participants explored how hospital and community-based nurses understand and respond to the priorities and consequences of AMR within their everyday working lives. Results: Nurses varied in their conceptualisations of AMR and in their depictions and explanations of its meaning and priority within everyday practices. Some saw infection prevention and control as bound up with AMR, whereas others differentiated in the context of specific work activities. Insights into related reasoning and practice tactics were also generated. Conclusions: The initial project phase provides a basis for fostering nursing innovation in this important field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and objectives: To examine the association between registered nurses' (referred to as "nurses" for brevity) shifts of 12 hr or more and presence of continuing educational programmes; ability to discuss patient care with other nurses; assignments that foster continuity of care; and patient care information being lost during handovers. Background: The introduction of long shifts (i.e., shifts of 12 hr or more) remains controversial. While there are claims of efficiency, studies have shown long shifts to be associated with adverse effects on quality of care. Efficiency claims are predicated on the assumption that long shifts reduce overlaps between shifts; these overlaps are believed to be unproductive and dangerous. However, there are potentially valuable educational and communication activities that occur during these overlaps. Design: Cross‐sectional survey of 31,627 nurses within 487 hospitals in 12 European countries. Methods: The associations were measured through generalised linear mixed models. The study methods were compliant with the STROBE checklist. Results: When nurses worked shifts of 12 hr or more, they were less likely to report having continuing educational programmes; and time to discuss patient care with other nurses, compared to nurses working 8 hr or less. Nurses working shifts of 12 hr or more were less likely to report assignments that foster continuity of care, albeit the association was not significant. Similarly, working long shifts was associated with reports of patient care information being lost during handovers, although association was not significant. Conclusion: Working shifts of 12 hr or more is associated with reduced educational activities and fewer opportunities to discuss patient care, with potential negative consequences for safe and effective care. Relevance to clinical practice: Implementation of long shifts should be questioned, as reduced opportunity to discuss care or participate in educational activities may jeopardise the quality and safety of care for patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]