Intentional rounding – An integrative literature review. (9th December 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ryan, Liz; Jackson, Debra; Woods, Cindy; Usher, Kim
• Is Part Of: Journal of advanced nursing. Volume 75:Number 6(2019)
• Page Start: 1151
• Page End: 1161
• Publication Date: 2018-12-09
• Subjects: clinical decision making -- clinical rounds -- falls -- nurse–patient relationship -- nursing -- nursing education -- patient safety -- patient satisfaction -- review literature; Nursing -- Periodicals; 610.7305
• DOI: 10.1111/jan.13897
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0309-2402

Abstract

Abstract: Aims: To establish current knowledge about the efficacy and acceptance of intentional rounding in current practice, from the perspective of nurses, patients, patient satisfaction and safety indicators. Background: Intentional rounding is a formal means of nursing staff checking care needs of patients in hospital settings on a regular basis. Design: An integrative literature review conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute manual. Data sources: A literature search from 2000 – 2017 was conducted using the following electronic databases: The Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ProQuest, PubMed, Informit, Sage and Scopus. Review methods: Articles were assessed for quality and rigor using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool and the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment tool for Quantitative Studies. A sequential explanatory mixed studies approach was used to combine qualitative and quantitative evidence in a single review. In‐depth parallel reviews of the quantitative and qualitative evidence were undertaken, and then a synthesis of the combined qualitative and quantitative evidence conducted. Results: Intentional rounding has positive outcomes on patient satisfaction and safety. Nurses perceive benefits related to intentional rounding; however, some nurses perceive it as an additional, unnecessary task. The effectiveness of intentional rounding is influenced by external factors including leadership and formal rounding education, workload, ward layout, staffing and experience level. Conclusion: Intentional rounding is a positive intervention in patient safety and satisfaction generally, but needs further research and consideration about actual impact, staff delegation, education and engagement, student nurse involvement, documentation and specializing the structure of intentional rounding. Abstract : 目的: 从护士、患者、患者满意度和安全指标的角度, 建立当前实践中关于有意舍入的有效性和可接受性的知识。 背景: 有意舍入是护理人员定期核实医院患者护理需求的正式方法。 设计: 根据澳大利亚循证护理中心手册进行综合文献综述。 资料来源: 使用以下电子数据库检索2000‐2017年的文献:护理与联合卫生文献累积索引、ProQuest、PubMed、Informit、Sage和Scopus。 综述方法: 使用定量研究的关键评估技能计划工具和有效公共卫生实践项目质量评估工具评估了文章的质量和严谨性。在单个综述中采用顺序性解释混合研究方法, 并结合定性证据和定量。对定量证据和定性进行了深入平行综述, 然后综合了定性和定量证据。 结果: 有意舍入对患者满意度和安全性有正面影响。护士认为有意舍入具有好处, 但一些护士认为其多余而没有必要。有意舍入的有效性受到领导层和正式舍入教育、工作量、病房布局、人员配备和经验水平等外部因素的影响。 结论: 总体而言, 有意舍入是对患者安全和满意度的积极介入, 但其实际影响、员工委派、教育和参与、实习护士参与、记录还需进一步研究考虑, 和有意舍入的结构也还需专门化。