Search

Background: The importance of respecting women's wishes to give birth close to their local community is supported by policy in many developed countries. However, persistent concerns about the quality and safety of maternity care in rural communities have been expressed. Safe childbirth in rural communities depends on good risk assessment and decision making as to whether and when the transfer of a woman in labour to an obstetric led unit is required. This is a difficult decision. Wide variation in transfer rates between rural maternity units have been reported suggesting different decision making criteria may be involved; furthermore, rural midwives and family doctors report feeling isolated in making these decisions and that staff in urban centres do not understand the difficulties they face. In order to develop more evidence based decision making strategies greater understanding of the way in which maternity care providers currently make decisions is required. This study aimed to examine how midwives working in urban and rural settings and obstetricians make intrapartum transfer decisions, and describe sources of variation in decision making. Methods: The study was conducted in three stages. 1. 20 midwives and four obstetricians described factors influencing transfer decisions. 2. Vignettes depicting an intrapartum scenario were developed based on stage one data. 3. Vignettes were presented to 122 midwives and 12 obstetricians who were asked to assess the level of risk in each case and decide whether to transfer or not. Social judgment analysis was used to identify the factors and factor weights used in assessment. Signal detection analysis was used to identify participants' ability to distinguish high and low risk cases and personal decision thresholds. Results: When reviewing the same case information in vignettes midwives in different settings and obstetricians made very similar risk assessments. Despite this, a wide range of transfer decisions were still made, suggesting that the main source of variation in decision making and transfer rates is not in the assessment but the personal decision thresholds of clinicians. Conclusions: Currently health care practice focuses on supporting or improving decision making through skills training and clinical guidelines. However, these methods alone are unlikely to be effective in improving consistency of decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Smoking trends among nurses are important to monitor as smoking negatively affects their health and decreases their likelihood of providing cessation interventions to patients. Objectives: The objective of the study was to describe the changes in smoking trends in the participants in the Nurses' Health Study (NHS) cohorts over 27 years. Methods: An analysis of biennial changes in smoking status and cigarette consumption within nine 5-year birth cohorts (1920-1924 to 1960-1964) and age-specific mortality rates by smoking status were examined in 237,648 female registered nurses (RNs): NHS (ages of 30-55 years in 1976, followed through 2002) and NHS II (ages of 25-42 years in 1989, followed through 2003). Results: Current smokers constituted 33.2% of NHS in 1976 and 13.5% of NHS II in 1989. Smoking rates declined in all birth cohorts; 8.4% were smoking in 2002/2003. Seventy- nine percent of nurses who ever smoked had quit. The mean cigarettes per day declined over time but still exceeded half a pack per day (15.1 cigarettes) at the end of follow-up. The mortality rate among current smokers was higher than that of former smokers and was approximately twice that of never smokers in all age categories; those who smoked were more likely to have comorbid conditions. Discussion: This study provides the first report of smoking trends among RNs in the NHS. The decline in smoking rate among female nurses mirrors the decline in smoking rate among women in the United States over the past 25 years. Increased mortality and morbidity rates indicate the devastating cost of smoking to the profession and can provide support for the urgent need for further research to encourage continued smoking cessation efforts for nursing professionals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Time pressure and, occasionally, suboptimal assessment decisions are features of nursing in acute care. Objectives: To explore the effect of generic and specialist clinical experience on the ability to detect the need to take action in acute care and the impact of time pressure on nurses' decision-making performance. Methods: Experienced acute care registered nurses (n = 241) were presented with 50 vignettes of real clinical risk assessments. Each vignette contained seven information cues. In response to these vignettes, nurses had to decide whether to intervene or not. The 26 vignettes were time limited and mixed randomly into the 50 cases. Signal detection analysis was used to establish nurses' performance, personal decision thresholds 03), and their abilities (d') to distinguish a signal of clinical risk from the clinical noise of noncontributory information. Results: Nurses had significantly lower d and were significantly less likely to indicate intervening under time pressure. For ability--but not threshold--there was a significant interaction of time pressure and years of experience in acute care. With no time pressure, d increased in line with years of experience. Under time pressure, there was no effect. Discussion: Time pressure reduced nurses' ability to detect the need and the tendency to report intervening. Thus, there were more failures to report appropriate intervention under time pressure, and the positive effects of clinical experience were negated under time pressure. More and larger scale research on the effect on clinical outcomes of time pressured nursing choices is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Title. Nursing’s ways of knowing and dual process theories of cognition Aim. This paper is a comparison of nursing’s patterns of knowing with the systems identified by cognitive science, and evaluates claims about the equal-status relation between scientific and non-scientific knowledge. Background. Ever since Carper’s seminal paper in 1978, it has been taken for granted in the nursing literature that there are ways of knowing, or patterns of knowing, that are not scientific. This idea has recently been used to argue that the concept of evidence, typically associated with evidence-based practice, is inappropriately restricted because it is identified exclusively with scientific research. Method. The paper reviews literature in psychology which appears to draw a comparable distinction between rule-based, analytical cognitive processes and other forms of cognitive processing which are unconscious, holistic and intuitive. Findings. There is a convincing parallel between the ‘patterns of knowing’ distinction in nursing and the ‘cognitive processing’ distinction in psychology. However, there is an important difference in the way the relation between different forms of knowing (or cognitive processing) is depicted. In nursing, it is argued that the different patterns of knowing have equal status and weight. In cognitive science, it is suggested that the rule-based, analytical form of cognition has a supervisory and corrective function with respect to the other forms. Conclusions. Scientific reasoning and evidence-based knowledge have epistemological priority over the other forms of nursing knowledge. The implications of this claim for healthcare practice are briefly indicated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The ‘BIS/BAS scales’ (Carver & White, 1994) is the most widely cited inventory for assessing Gray’s (1982,1991) Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST) of personality. A peculiarity of this instrument is its three-factor representation of Gray’s Behavioural Activation System (BAS), which mediates reactions to reward. While the BAS was initially proposed as the causal basis of Impulsivity, recent arguments suggest that Impulsivity is related to but distinct from reward-reactivity. In this paper, two studies examined Carver and White’s BAS scales in terms of factor structure, and convergent/divergent validity when predicting proxies of Impulsivity and reward-reactivity. Confirmatory Factor Analysis revealed structural distinctions between the three BAS scales, and multivariate regression suggested that two of the scales (Drive and Reward-Responsiveness) reflect key concepts of the BAS, while the third (Fun-Seeking) has a broader focus, being equally related to reward-reactivity and Impulsivity. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Nursing's Ways of Knowing and Dual Process Theories of Cognition" published in a 2007 issue.