4.6 Article

A descriptive study of nurse-reported missed care in neonatal intensive care units

期刊

JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING
卷 71, 期 4, 页码 813-824

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jan.12578

关键词

missed nursing care; neonatal intensive care; nursing; outcomes; quality; safety

类别

资金

  1. Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center [07/01/12-06/30/14]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AimsThe aims of this study are to describe: (1) the frequency of nurse-reported missed care in neonatal intensive care units; and (2) nurses' reports of factors contributing to missed care on their last shift worked. BackgroundMissed nursing care, or necessary care that is not delivered, is increasingly cited as a contributor to adverse patient outcomes. Previous studies highlight the frequency of missed nursing care in adult settings; the occurrence of missed nursing care in neonatal intensive care units is unknown. DesignA descriptive analysis of neonatal nurses' self-reports of missed care using data collected through a cross-sectional web-based survey. MethodsA random sample of certified neonatal intensive care nurses in seven states was invited to participate in the survey in April 2012. Data were collected from nurses who provide direct patient care in a neonatal intensive care unit (n=230). Descriptive statistics constituted the primary analytic approach. ResultsNurses reported missing a range of patient care activities on their last shift worked. Nurses most frequently missed rounds, oral care for ventilated infants, educating and involving parents in care and oral feedings. Hand hygiene, safety and physical assessment and medication administration were missed least often. The most common reasons for missed care included frequent interruptions, urgent patient situations and an unexpected rise in patient volume and/or acuity on the unit. ConclusionWe find that basic nursing care in the neonatal intensive care unit is missed and that system factors may contribute to missed care in this setting.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据