3.8 Article

Undergraduate Nursing Students and Management of Interruptions: Preparation of Students for Future Workplace Realities

Journal

NURSING EDUCATION PERSPECTIVES
Volume 42, Issue 6, Pages 350-357

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.NEP.0000000000000886

Keywords

Associative Cues; Interruption Management; Interruptions; Nursing Students; Simulation

Funding

  1. International Nursing Association for Clinical Simulation in Nursing
  2. National League for Nursing

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Nursing students primarily multitasked during interruptions and only a small percentage used associative cues. Students expressed the need for education and practice on managing interruptions. Further investigation on the use of associative cues during interruptions is warranted.
AIM The aim of this study was to investigate interruption management strategies and associative cues used by nursing students when interrupted during simulated medication administration. BACKGROUND Interruptions occur with high frequency in health care settings and are associated with increased medication errors and decreased task efficiency. The Altmann and Trafton memory for goals model, a cognitive-science model, proposes use of associative cues during an interruption to mitigate these negative effects. METHOD A mixed-methods, two-site study explored associative cues and other management strategies that nursing students used when interrupted during simulated medication administration. Data were collected via direct observation and semistructured interviews. RESULTS Students primarily multitasked (66.7 percent) during the interruption. Few students (5.5 percent) used associative cues. Students voiced the need for education and practice on how to manage interruptions. CONCLUSION Evidence-based strategies are required to prepare nursing students for workplace interruptions. Use of associative cues during interruptions warrants further investigation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available