Dataset Information

"But I did not touch nobody!"-Patients' and nurses' perspectives and recommendations after aggression on psychiatric wards-A qualitative study.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

To gain a deeper understanding of the differences in patients and staff perspectives in response to aggression and to explore recommendations on prevention.

Design

Qualitative, grounded theory study.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured interviews with patients and nurses involved in an aggressive incident. Data collection was performed from May 2016 - March 2017.

Results

Thirty-one interviews were conducted concerning 15 aggressive incidents. Patients and nurses generally showed agreement on the factual course of events, there was variation in agreement on the perceived severity (PS). Patients' recommendations on prevention were mostly personally focussed, while nurses suggested general improvements.

Conclusion

Patients are often capable to evaluate aggression and give recommendations on prevention shortly after the incident. Patients and nurses differ in the PS of aggression. Recommendations on prevention of patients and nurses are complementary.

Impact

What problem did the study address? Perspectives of patients and nurses differ with respect to aggression, but how is unclear. What were the main findings? Patients and nurses generally described a similar factual course of events concerning the incident, patients often perceive the severity less than nurses. Patients are capable to give recommendations on prevention of aggressive incidents, shortly after the incident. Where and on whom will the research have impact? Factual course of events can be a common ground to start evaluating aggressive incidents and post-incident review should address the severity of incidents. Asking recommendations from patients on how to improve safety and de-escalation can lead to innovative and personal de-escalation strategies and supports patients autonomy.

SUBMITTER: Vermeulen JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6899923 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite an increase in emphasis on psychosocial care in cancer nursing, time constraints and nurses' lack of knowledge in skilled communication continue to be challenges. AIMS:To examine how cancer care nurses view their communication with patients and how they deal with the psychosocial needs of patients in busy wards. DESIGN:A qualitative interview study. METHODS:Focus groups and individual interviews were conducted with eleven hospital-based cancer nurses in Hong Kong from July 2, 2017 to January 2, 2018. RESULTS:A qualitative thematic analysis of the data identified three themes: 1. Intentional and unintentional psychosocial care that is secondary in focus; 2. Managing an emotionally challenged environment; 3. Mentoring and learning. CONCLUSION:Oncology settings are time-constrained, emotionally charged environments for nurses, and providing psychosocial care for patients is a secondary concern. While proactive strategies can be used to avert patient complaints, being open and attending to the individual needs of patients is equally important to avoid blocking in nurse-patient communication. Despite emotional entanglement and tensions, the positive follow-up strategies used by nurses to manage the patients' emotions and provide psychosocial care reflect good practices. Leadership and support are needed to deal with the nurses' perception that their communication training has been ineffective and their ability to manage strong emotions deficient. Communication skills, honed by making continuous opportunities to communicate available, as well as an understanding of emotional labour, need to be integrated with mindfulness in the nurses' care of themselves and their patients. Notwithstanding the importance of experience in oncology care for junior nurses, it is necessary for both junior and senior nurses to learn about and reflect upon the different forms of emotional labour if value-based care is to be provided. In addition, it is essential for junior nurses to receive continuous coaching and mentoring, and to engage in reflective learning from each clinical encounter with oncology patients.

Project description:BackgroundAbsconding (i.e., escaping) is common among patients with mental illness admitted to psychiatric hospitals. Patients use various strategies to make absconding successful due to the experiences faced during admission. We conducted a study to identify patients' perspectives on the experience of absconding from the psychiatry facility.MethodsWe conducted 10 in-depth interviews with patients with a history of absconding from the hospital who were accessing care at the Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital in Mbarara city Uganda. Interviews were audio-recorded, translated when required, transcribed into English, and analyzed thematically to identify relevant themes.ResultsParticipants ranged in age from 18 to 55 and the majority (n = 9) were male. Most had absconded at least twice from a psychiatric facility. We identified different experiences that influenced patients' engagement in absconding from the psychiatry hospital ward. These included: (1) stigma, (2) experiences with caregivers: mixed emotions, (3) poor resources and services, and (4) the influence of mental illness symptoms. The loneliness of stigma, negative emotions associated with the loss of important roles given the nature and framework of caregiving on the psychiatric ward, as well as the stress of limited resources were a salient part of the patient experience as it relates to absconding.ConclusionOur findings indicate that absconding is a symptom of a larger problem with a mental health system that perpetuates stigma in its design, isolates patients and makes them feel lonely, and forces patients to rely on caregivers who infantilize them and take away all their freedom in a facility with no basic services. For many patients, this makes absconding the only option. Within such a system, all stakeholders (policymakers, health-care providers, caregivers, and patients) should be involved in rethinking how psychiatric facilities should be operated to make the journey of patient recovery more positive.

Project description:BackgroundAfter hospital discharge, patients can experience symptoms prompting them to seek acute medical attention. Early evaluation of patients' post-discharge symptoms by healthcare providers may improve appropriate healthcare utilization and patient safety. Post-discharge follow-up phone calls, which are used for routine transitional care in U.S. hospitals, serve as an important channel for provider-patient communication about symptoms. This study aimed to assess the facilitators and barriers to evaluating and triaging pain symptoms in cardiovascular patients through follow-up phone calls after their discharge from a large healthcare system in Central Massachusetts. We also discuss strategies that may help address the identified barriers.MethodsGuided by the Practical, Robust, Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM), we completed semi-structured interviews with 7 nurses and 16 patients in 2020. Selected nurses conducted (or supervised) post-discharge follow-up calls on behalf of 5 clinical teams (2 primary care; 3 cardiology). We used thematic analysis to identify themes from interviews and mapped them to the domains of the PRISM model.ResultsParticipants described common facilitators and barriers related to the four domains of PRISM: Intervention (I), Recipients (R), Implementation and Sustainability Infrastructure (ISI), and External Environment (EE). Facilitators include: (1) patients being willing to receive provider follow-up (R); (2) nurses experienced in symptom assessment (R); (3) good care coordination within individual clinical teams (R); (4) electronic health record system and call templates to support follow-up calls (ISI); and (5) national and institutional policies to support post-discharge follow-up (EE). Barriers include: (1) limitations of conducting symptom assessment by provider-initiated follow-up calls (I); (2) difficulty connecting patients and providers in a timely manner (R); (3) suboptimal coordination for transitional care among primary care and cardiology providers (R); and (4) lack of emphasis on post-discharge follow-up call reimbursement among cardiology clinics (EE). Specific barriers for pain assessment include: (1) concerns with pain medication misuse (R); and (2) no standardized pain assessment and triage protocol (ISI).ConclusionsStrategies to empower patients, facilitate timely patient-provider communication, and support care coordination regarding pain evaluation and treatment may reduce the barriers and improve processes and outcomes of pain assessment and triage.

Project description:BackgroundIn British Columbia (BC), Canada, clinicians are responsible for giving involuntary psychiatric patients rights information upon admission. Yet an investigation by the BC Office of the Ombudsperson found that clinicians are not always fulfilling this responsibility. The Ombudsperson recommended that the provincial government fund an independent body to give rights advice to patients.MethodsTo understand how clinicians feel about this recommendation, focus groups of clinicians who may give psychiatric patients rights information (n = 81) were conducted in Vancouver, BC, to probe their attitudes toward independent rights advisors. The focus group transcripts were thematically analyzed.ResultsMost clinicians believe that giving rights information is within their scope of practice, although some acknowledge that it poses a conflict of interest when the patient wishes to challenge the treatment team's decisions. Participants' chief concerns about an independent rights-advice service were that (a) patients may experience a delay in receiving their rights information, (b) integrating rights advisors into the workflow would complicate an already chaotic admission process, and (c) more patients would be counselled to challenge their hospitalization, leading to an increased administrative workload for clinical staff. However, many participants believed that independent rights advisors would be a positive addition to the admission process, both allowing clinicians to focus on treatment and serving as a source of rights-related information.ConclusionsParticipants were generally amenable to an independent rights-advice service, suggesting that the introduction of rights advisors need not result in an adversarial relationship between treatment team and patient, as opponents of the proposal fear. Clearly distinguishing between basic rights information and in-depth rights advice could address several of the clinicians' concerns about the role that independent rights advisors would play in the involuntary admission process. Clinicians' and other stakeholders' concerns should be considered as the province develops its rights-advice service.

Project description:ObjectivesTo understand healthcare professionals' experiences and perceptions of nurses' potential or ideal roles in pharmaceutical care (PC).DesignQualitative study conducted through semi-structured in-depth interviews.SettingBetween December 2018 and October 2019, interviews were conducted with healthcare professionals of 14 European countries in four healthcare settings: hospitals, community care, mental health and long-term residential care.ParticipantsIn each country, pharmacists, physicians and nurses in each of the four settings were interviewed. Participants were selected on the basis that they were key informants with broad knowledge and experience of PC.Data collection and analysisAll interviews were conducted face to face. Each country conducted an initial thematic analysis. Consensus was reached through a face-to-face discussion of all 14 national leads.Results340 interviews were completed. Several tasks were described within four potential nursing responsibilities, that came up as the analysis themes, being: 1) monitoring therapeutic/adverse effects of medicines, 2) monitoring medicines adherence, 3) decision making on medicines, including prescribing 4) providing patient education/information. Nurses' autonomy varied across Europe, from none to limited to a few tasks and emergencies to a broad range of tasks and responsibilities. Intended level of autonomy depended on medicine types and level of education. Some changes are needed before nursing roles can be optimised and implemented in practice. Lack of time, shortage of nurses, absence of legal frameworks and limited education and knowledge are main threats to European nurses actualising their ideal role in PC.ConclusionsEuropean nurses have an active role in PC. Respondents reported positive impacts on care quality and patient outcomes when nurses assumed PC responsibilities. Healthcare professionals expect nurses to report observations and assessments. This key patient information should be shared and addressed by the interprofessional team. The study evidences the need of a unique and consensus-based PC framework across Europe.

Project description:Balancing the number of nursing staff in relation to the number of patients is important for hospitals to remain efficient and optimizing the use of resources. One way to do this is to work with a workload management method. Many workload management methods use a time study to determine how nurses spend their time and to relate this to patient characteristics in order to predict nurse workload.In our study, we aim to determine how nurses spend their working day and we will attempt to explain differences between specialized surgical wards.The research took place in an academic hospital in the Netherlands. Six surgical wards were included, capacity 15 to 30 beds.We have used a work sampling methodology where trained observers registered activities of nurses and patient details every ten minutes during the day shift for a time period of three weeks.The work sampling showed that nurses spend between 40.1% and 55.8% of their time on direct patient care. In addition to this, nurses spend between 11.0% and 14.1% on collective patient care. In total, between 52.1% and 68% of time spent on tasks is directly patient related. We found significant differences between wards for 10 of the 21 activity groups. We also found that nurses spend on average 31% with the patient (bedside), which is lower than in another study (37%). However, we noticed a difference between departments. For regular surgical departments in our study this was on average 34% and for two departments that have additional responsibilities in training and education of nursing students, this was on average 25%.We found a relatively low percentage of time spent on direct plus indirect care, and a lower percentage of time spent with the patient. We suspect that this is due to the academic setting of the study; in our hospital, there are more tasks related to education than in hospitals in other study settings. We also found differences between the wards in our study, which are mostly explained by differences in the patient mix, nurse staffing (proportion of nursing students), type of surgery and region of the body where the surgery was performed. However, we could not explain all differences. We made a first attempt in identifying and explaining differences in nurses' activities between wards, however this domain needs more research in order to better explain the differences.