As members of the healthcare team, nursing students assume a large part of the treatment and care of patients during their clinical practice, and therefore, they play a vital role in preventing pathogenic contamination and the spread of contagious diseases (Labrague, McEnroe-Petitte, Van de Mortel, & Nasirudeen, 2018). For this reason, nursing students should be provided with the skills to adopt effective handwashing habits, which would be an important step in the direction
PurposeThis study aims to identify NANDA‐I nursing diagnoses that midwives working in obstetrics and gynecologic service use while managing the electronic nursing care process.MethodsThis retrospective study was conducted in a descriptive way to evaluate electronic care plan records of 3025 patients staying in obstetrics and gynecologic service between April 1, 2020. and April 1, 2021. Diagnoses in the records of the electronic care process were digitalized by two faculty members. Then, NANDA‐I nursing diagnoses used by midwives were identified. NANDA‐I nursing diagnoses used by midwives were identified.FindingsIt was determined that diagnoses in care plans documented from the system within the 1‐year period fell into eight domains and 10 classes, and 5819 diagnoses were given in total. The most frequent diagnoses given in obstetrics and gynecologic service were "acute pain" and "risk for bleeding."ConclusionFindings of this study revealed that nursing care records in obstetrics and gynecologic service did not have a large number of diagnoses and interventions.Implications for nursing practiceCare plans directly reflect the contribution of the care to the patient. Consequently, midwives being aware of and recording nursing diagnoses while giving care will ensure a standardized language and visibility in care. More coverage of midwifery‐related diagnoses in the midwifery curriculum will make NANDA‐I nursing diagnoses more visible in midwifery as well.
This experimental study, which was conducted to examine the necessity of aspiration procedure and its effect on pain in intramuscular (IM) injections made into the ventrogluteal site (VGS), is randomized controlled and double-blind. The patients in the study group ( n = 834) were assigned to the IM group with the aspiration period of 5 to 10 seconds (Implementation Group A-IGA), the aspiration period of 1 to 2 seconds (Control Group-CG), and no aspiration (Implementation Group B-IGB) according to stratified block randomization list. Patients’ pain levels were evaluated with the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). No bleeding was observed when aspiration periods of 1 to 2 and 5 to 10 seconds were followed during the injections administered to the VGS. The difference between the pain medians of patients in IGB and the CG were not significant ( p = .521). It can be said that there is no need to apply aspiration in IM applied into the VGS if the correct site is determined.
Background
All clinical alarms require nurses to respond even if an intervention is not needed. Nurses are expected to respond appropriately to each alarm and establish priorities among their care practices accordingly. This study was conducted to examine the number and types of clinical device alarms used in intensive care units, the duration of their activation, and nurses’ degree of sensitivity to them.
Methods
This observational study was conducted in 4 intensive care units in a university hospital in Turkey. A total of 20 nurses (5 from each unit) were observed for a total of 80 hours. The alarms were categorized as valid, false, or technical.
Results
During the study observation period, the mean number of alarms sounding per hour per bed was 1.8. A total of 144 alarms were recorded, of which 70.8% were valid, 15.3% were false, and 13.9% were technical. The mean duration of alarm activation was 8 minutes for valid alarms, 14 minutes for false alarms, and 53 minutes for technical alarms.
Conclusions
Nurses’ responses to alarms differ depending on alarm type; for alarms that do not require an emergency intervention, nurses tend to respond late or not at all.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.