Investigating the relationship between nurses' understanding of working environment conditions and safety outcomes in patients hospitalized in special care units of medical education centers in Gilan province in 2013

Number of pages: 85 File Format: word File Code: 31923
Year: 2013 University Degree: Master's degree Category: Health - Health
  • Part of the Content
  • Contents & Resources
  • Summary of Investigating the relationship between nurses' understanding of working environment conditions and safety outcomes in patients hospitalized in special care units of medical education centers in Gilan province in 2013

    Dissertation to receive a master's degree in intensive care nursing

    Introduction: Maintaining safety and preventing side effects, especially in patients hospitalized in wards, is a concern

    It has become a global concern in the field of health and wellness and has led to the issue of the effectiveness of working environment conditions.

    Objectives: This study was conducted with the aim of determining the relationship between the nurses' understanding of the working environment conditions and the safety outcomes of patients hospitalized in the special care units of Gilan province's medical education centers.

    Methodology: This descriptive-analytical cross-sectional study was conducted on 101 nurses working in the special care units of Gilan province with specified characteristics.  The research samples were selected by census method. The data were collected by self-report method and using a 3-part tool, including a questionnaire made by the researcher in the field of individual information of the samples, a sheet for recording the frequency of 4 unwanted outcomes (medication errors, ventilator-associated pneumonia, pressure ulcers, and patient falls) in special care units and a standard scale of nurses' understanding of the working environment conditions and using descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation, and frequency percentage) and inferential (chi-square tests, correlation coefficient) Spearman, independent t-test and Mann-Whitney test) were analyzed. 

    Findings: The results of this research show that the doctor-nurse communication subscale had the highest percentage (72.5%) of favorable status. The score obtained in the standard scale of working environment conditions in nursing was in the optimal group in about half (50.5%) of the samples, which had a significant relationship with the type of departments (p<0.01).  This finding also showed that ventilator-dependent pneumonia had the highest mean and standard deviation of incidence (2.8±2.92) among the unwanted safety outcomes. All unwanted safety outcomes had a mean and standard deviation of incidence of 0.88±1.05. Finally, a significant relationship was observed between the marital status of the samples with medication errors (P<0.02) and the department of activity with the incidence of ventilator-dependent pneumonia (P<0.001), medication errors (P<0.001), the incidence of patient falls ((P<0.05 and all safety outcomes P<0.05)).  But the nurses' understanding of the overall conditions of the work environment did not have a statistically significant relationship with the perceived incidence of unwanted safety consequences by the nurses.

    Final conclusion: The presence of a statistically significant difference between the workplace department with the percentage of occurrence of 3 of the outcomes and all of them indicates the need for special attention to improve the working environment conditions in a variety of special care departments.

    Statement of the problem

    Safety is a global concept that includes adequacy, security of care, appropriate response of caregivers and satisfaction of patients and relatives. Based on this, patient safety is considered as a main goal to improve health care (1) and after that the term patient outcomes [1] has been proposed (2). This term, which takes into account all the different functional, social, physical, psychological and physiological aspects of the patient's experience in the two perspectives of positive outcomes and adverse events[2], has received attention in numerous studies and researches(3).

    Despite the great emphasis of experts on maintaining safety, reliable international evidence shows that the safety of patients in healthcare centers is not in a favorable condition (4). The results of various studies along with the reports of the World Health Organization have shown that between 3 and 16 percent of hospitalized patients are affected by adverse events such as medication errors, care-related infections, or falls (2). Mazieh[3] also reports the rate of occurrence of these events in one out of ten patients admitted to hospitals in the world and writes that developing countries have a higher proportion of these complications(3). The high prevalence of these side effects or side events has drawn researchers' attention to nurses and their performance. Because the role of nursing care in the outcomes of hospitalized patients is well known (5).In this regard, the American National Quality Council [4] has introduced certain clinical outcomes from the perspective of patient nursing, which include pressure ulcers [5], ventilator-dependent pneumonia [6], blood infection related to central catheters, failure to resuscitate the patient [7], patient falls, falls with injury, use of restraints, and medication errors (6). These consequences have a direct effect on the quality of care provided by nurses, and are of great importance in terms of pathogenicity and attenuation. Because these incidents can lead to temporary disabilities (34% of cases), permanent (6-9% of cases) or death (3% of cases) of patients (2). For example, falling, with a prevalence of 2 to 12% in hospitalized patients, can cause hip fracture, brain hemorrhage, and ultimately death of the affected(7). Statistics show that 48-98,000 deaths occur in the United States every year due to unwanted consequences and complications caused by them (8).

    The costs associated with the treatment of these complications are also increasing and staggering, for example, the annual cost of treating pressure ulcers in the United States is nearly 11 billion dollars (9) and the cost associated with medication errors is estimated at 3.5 billion dollars (8). In addition to increasing the duration of each patient's stay in the hospital for an average of 25 days, the ventilator also increases the hospitalization costs of each patient to about 12,000 dollars (10). Because patients hospitalized in special care units often require special care with multiple organ failure and multiple abnormalities (11). Due to the need for respiratory support and mechanical ventilation, as well as access to central vessels to administer drugs, these patients are usually at high risk of unwanted consequences such as ventilator-associated pneumonia, blood infection related to central catheters, and pressure ulcers (12), which will lead to more complications and death (13).  On the other hand, the type and quality of nursing care provided in special care units [8] is different from normal units due to high levels of work-related stress. Naturally, the high level of work stress in intensive care units increases the risk of medical errors and will lead to more serious unwanted consequences in patients (12). Therefore, nurses in special care units, due to the unstable physiological conditions of patients and their greater dependence on caregivers, are faced with the challenge of providing optimal care and advanced services along with reducing costs and the length of the patient's stay in the hospital(13).

         The important point and agreed upon by the majority of experts is the preventability of safety consequences and their strong connection with the quality of nursing care provided to patients(14). Therefore, knowing the magnitude of these incidents and identifying solutions for them in complex health care environments will be a necessary step for planning strategies to promote positive patient outcomes and ensure safe and effective care provision (3). Garoust-Orgeas [9] and colleagues also emphasize the high prevalence of adverse events in special departments and the necessity of accurate reporting systems, and write that their prevention requires multifaceted changes in the organization of special care departments and the behavior of health care workers (1). In this way, the role of structural, organizational and management factors in the occurrence of such events should not be ignored. Because the structural components of the department, such as the work environment, and the characteristics of care workers play a vital role in providing quality care leading to patient safety and satisfaction (15). Meanwhile, the conditions of the work environment or organizational characteristics that facilitate professional activities in the work environment are among the concepts that have received special attention today (14). The components related to the conditions of the professional work environment in nursing, according to the definition of the Association of American Colleges of Nursing [10], include conditions that improve the quality of patient care, which, with multi-system cooperation, will be the basis for the improvement of nurses' knowledge and professional progress. In fact, the conditions of the working environment are a combination of the characteristics of organizations, departments and units, nurses and patients

  • Contents & References of Investigating the relationship between nurses' understanding of working environment conditions and safety outcomes in patients hospitalized in special care units of medical education centers in Gilan province in 2013

    List:

    Chapter 1: Statement of the problem. Statement of the problem. 1. Definitions of words. 5. Research objectives. 7. Research questions. 8. Research hypotheses. 9. Limitations of the research. 9. Research assumptions. 10. The second chapter: Background and research background

    · Conceptual framework 12

    ·          Review of studies 29.

    Chapter three:  Research materials and methods. Type of research. 42. Research community. 42. Research environment. 42. Research samples. 43. Characteristics of research units. 43. Determination of sample size.

    ·        Data collection tool. 43

    ·        Determining the validity and scientific reliability of the tool. 45. Data collection method. 46. Data analysis method. 46. Ethical considerations. 48. Fourth chapter: Research findings

    ·         Tables. 51

    Chapter five: Discussion and conclusion. Discussion and review of findings. 69. Final conclusion. 77. Application of findings in nursing. 79. Suggestion for application of findings. 82. Suggestion for further research. 82. List. References.83

    Appendices

    English abstract

     

     

     

    Source:

     

    1. Garrouste-Orgeas M, Philippart F, Bruel C, Max A, Lau N, Misset B. Overview of medical errors and adverse events. Annals of Intensive Care. 2012;2(1):1-9.

    2. BATES D. Global priorities for patient safety research. BMJ British medical journal. 2009;338(7705):1242-4.

    3. AMa M, Ob W. Nursing Practice Environment and Patient Outcomes in University Hospitals in Malaysia Health and the Environment Journal, 2012;3 (1):16-26.

    4. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS. To err is human: building a safer health system: National Academies Press; 2000.

    5. Siow E, Wypij D, Berry P, Hickey P, Curley M. The Effect of Continuity in Nursing Care on Patient Outcomes in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit. Journal of Nursing Administration. 2013;43(7/8):394-402.

    6. National Quality Forum. (2004). National voluntary consensus standards for nursing172 sensitive care: An initial performance measurement set. Retrieved from http://www.qualityforum.org.

    7. Commission J. Improving America's hospitals: the Joint Commission's annual report on quality and safety, 2007. Retrieved February. 2008;25:2009.

    8. Medicine Io. Preventing medication errors: Quality chasm series 2007.

    9. Reddy M, Gill SS, Rochon PA. Preventing pressure ulcers: a systematic review. JAMA: the journal of the American Medical Association. 2006;296(8):974-84.

    10. Warren DK, Shukla SJ, Olsen MA, Kollef MH, Hollenbeak CS, Cox MJ, et al. Outcome and attributable cost of ventilator-associated pneumonia among intensive care unit patients in a suburban medical center*. Critical care medicine. 2003;31(5):1312-7.

    11. Ala S, Pakravan N, Ahmadi M. Mortality Rate and Outcome among Patients Admitted to General Intensive Care Unit during "Morning-Hour" Compared with "Off-Hour". International Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2012;3(3):171-7.

    12. Boev CA, editor Nurse-physician collaboration and Healthcare Associated Infections in Critical Care. Sigma Theta Tau International's 24th International Nursing Research Congress; 2013: STTI.

    13. Sole.ML KD, and Moseley.MJ. Introduction to Critical Care Nursing Elsevier Saunders.st.louis; 2010.

    14. Lake ET. Development of the practice environment scale of the nursing work index†‡. Research in nursing & health. 2002;25(3):176-88.

    15. Ausserhofer D, Schubert M, Desmedt M, Blegen MA, De Geest S, Schwendimann R.. The association of patient safety climate and nurse-related organizational factors with selected patient outcomes: A cross-sectional survey. International journal of nursing studies. 2013;50(2):240-52.

    16. Nursing AAoCo. Hallmarks of the professional nursing practice environment. Journal of Professional Nursing. 2002;18:295-304.

    17. Aiken LH, Sloane DM, Clarke S, Poghosyan L, Cho E, You L, et al. Importance of work environments on hospital outcomes in nine countries. International Journal for Quality in Health Care. 2011;23(4):357-64.

    18. Aiken LH, Sermeus W, Van den Heede K, Sloane DM, Busse R, McKee M, et al. Patient safety, satisfaction, and quality of hospital care: cross-sectional surveys of nurses and patients in 12 countries in Europe and the United States. BMJ: British Medical Journal. 2012;344.

    19. Laschinger HKS, Leiter MP. The impact of nursing work environments on patient safety outcomes: The mediating role of burnout engagement. Journal of Nursing Administration. 2006;36(5):259-67.

    20. Kutney-Lee A, McHugh, M.D., Sloane, D.M., Cimiotti, J.P., Neff, D.F., & Aiken, L.H. Nursing: A key to patient satisfaction. Health Affairs. 2009;28:w669-w77.

    21. Manojlovich M, DeCicco B. Healthy work environments, nurse-physician communication, and patients' outcomes. American Journal of Critical Care. 2007;16(6):536-43.

    22. Manojlovich M, Antonakos CL, Ronis DL. Intensive care units, communication between nurses and physicians, and patients' outcomes. American Journal of Critical Care. 2009;18(1):21-30.

    23. Boyle, S.M. (2004). Nursing unit characteristics and patient outcomes. Nursing

    Economics, 22(3), 111-123.     

    24. Friese CR, Lake ET, Aiken LH, Silber JH, Sochalski J. Hospital nurse practice environments and outcomes for surgical oncology patients. Health services research. 2008;43(4):1145-63.

    25.Aiken LA, Clarke, S.P., Sloane, D.M., Lake, E.T., & Cheney, T. Effects of hospital care environment on patient mortality and nurse outcomes. Journal of Nursing Administration. 2008;38:223-9.

    26.McCusker J, Dendukuri N, Cardinal L, Laplante J, Bambonye L. Nursing work environment and quality of care: differences between units at the same hospital. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance. 2004;17(6):22-313.

    27. Boev CA. The Relationship Between Nurses' Perception of Work Environment and Nurse-sensitive Patient Outcomes in Adult Critical Care: University of Rochester; 2011.

    28. Lake E, Rogowski, J., Horbar, J., Staiger, D., Kenny, M., Patrick, T., et al). Better VLBW infant outcomes in nursing magnet hospitals. . Better VLBW infant outcomes in nursing magnet hospitals. Paper presented at the Child Health Services Research Meeting, Chicago, Illinois 2009.

    29. Warshawsky NE, Havens DS. Global Use of the Practice Environment Scale of the Nursing Work Index. Nursing research: An AJN Company publication. 2011 (1):17-31.

    30. Aspden P, Wolcott J, Bootman JL, Cronenwett L. Committee on Identifying and Preventing Medication Errors, Institute of Medicine: Preventing Medication Errors, Quality Chasm Series. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2007.

    31. Rello J, Ollendorf DA, Oster G, Vera-Llonch M, Bellm L, Redman R, et al. Epidemiology and outcomes of ventilator-associated pneumonia in a large US database. CHEST Journal. 2002;122(6):2115-21.

    32. Committee on Identifying and Preventing Medication Errors IoM. , Preventing Medication Errors. : : National Academies Press; 2006.

    33. Lisby M, Nielsen LP, Brock B, Mainz J. How are medication errors defined? A systematic literature review of definitions and characteristics. International Journal for Quality in Health Care. 2010;22(6):18-507.

    34. George B. PRESSURE ULCER STAGES. Rehab Management. 2008.

    35.Stevens JA, Corso, P.S., Finklestein, E.A., & Miller, T.R.

Investigating the relationship between nurses' understanding of working environment conditions and safety outcomes in patients hospitalized in special care units of medical education centers in Gilan province in 2013