WZT Task 1 Essays - Health, Medicine, Nursing,

WZT Task 1 Amara Smallcombe A1. Article Bradley, S., Mott, S. (2010). Handover: Faster and safer? Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, 30(1), 23-32. http://www.ajan.com.au/Vol30/Issue1/Bradley.pdf A2. Graphic Introduction Routinely, change of shift report in the hospital setting was given away from the patient in a designated area. In this article, the researchers set out to see if giving report at the bedside in front of the patient would be safer and, possibly, decrease the amount of time necessary to give report. Review of Literature I found several references, which were reputable, that showed the facts/ statistics during which time the research was completed. The info on satisfaction for the patients and the staff along with the info for safety was provided but I could not find any info relating to the economics or cost effectiveness. A period of 62 year was covered from 1947 to 2009; the earlier sources are indirectly related. I did not find any data which related to any adverse safety concerns while shift change report was being conducted elsewhere. But, I could see the inference which was made that adverse events decreased when switching to bedside report. Discussion of Methodology A mixture of quantitative and qualitative methods were used in this study. Three small hospitals with a group of 48 nurses were involved with solely giving report to the oncoming shift at the bedside. This was conducted in three stages. First, quantitative. This stage showed the amount of time it took to complete bedside report and if any adverse events regarding the patients had occurred. Second, ethnographic. This showed what kind of information was discussed during report and what kind of terminology was used. Last, interviews. This last stage would show what the nurses thought of it and if they liked it better than before, and if it was a quicker process from start to finish. These three things were done before and after initiation of the change. Data Analysis When a quantitative study is done, the researchers gather numerical data and examine it. This such data for this study was how long it took to give report before and after the change. A graph was made to show the differences. Qualitative data was collected from the nurses in interview format which showed that the nurses believed that giving report away from their patients was a challenge and took up a lot of time. There were graphs which showed this data comparing three sites. This showed a mixed model approach. Researcher's Conclusion The researcher came to the conclusion at the end of this research that showed that bedside shift change report took less time than giving report in another designated area away from the patient. There was no discussion, though, about how saving this time would be cost effective. It was also shown that a reduction in adverse events, which parallels the idea that bedside report leads to an increase in patient safety. More research needs to be completed to find out if this type of report is more accurate and if it leads to better communication. A3. Assessment of Evidence It was concluded that the researchers represented accuracy in their results. The purpose of this study was to show that giving report to the oncoming shift at the bedside would be quicker and more beneficial for the staff and for the patients. It was, also, the intentions of the researchers to show how this method would improve patient safety and save money for their facility. Another thing that the researchers wanted to display was the attitudes and perceptions of the staff relating to the process before and after the change in procedure. In review, the bedside method was quicker than giving report away from the patient. It is unfortunate, however, that no benefit of cost was equated while completing this study. At the conclusion of this study, it was shown that adverse events regarding patient safety decreased in number from 18 to seven signifying an increase in the safety involving patients. It was reported from all three sites that participated in this study had improve d on report duration. The researchers did acknowledge, however, that there were limitations in this study because of sample size and the