Infection prevention and control in home nursing: case study of four organisations in Australia

Felemban, Ohood; John, Winsome St; Shaban, Ramon Z.

doi:10.12968/bjcn.2015.20.9.451

Cited by 12 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Effective PPE must be available for midwives based in the community for antenatal appointments and for assisting births [ 6 ]. Studies of infection control and personal protective equipment (PPE) in home healthcare have focused on hospital-in-the-home, where healthcare workers are caring for unwell people and often doing regular invasive procedures [ 21 , 22 ] rather than in the context of pregnancy care. Maintaining infection control in the home environments can be more difficult and this is even more so during a pandemic when PPE is a heightened issue [ 23 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The impact of planning for COVID-19 on private practising midwives in Australia

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Problem The COVID-19 pandemic response has required planning for the safe provision of care. In Australia, privately practising midwives are an important group to consider as they often struggle for acceptance by the health system. Background There are around 200 Endorsed Midwives eligible to practice privately in Australia (privately practising midwives) who provide provide the full continuum of midwifery care. Aim To explore the experience of PPMs in relation to the response to planning for the COVID-19 pandemic Methods An online survey was distributed through social media and personal networks to privately practising midwives in Australia in April 2020. Results One hundred and three privately practising midwives responded to the survey. The majority (82%) felt very, or well informed, though nearly half indicated they would value specifically tailored information especially from professional bodies. One third (35%) felt prepared regarding PPE but many lacked masks, gowns and gloves, hand sanitiser and disinfectant. Sixty four percent acquired PPE through social media community sharing sites, online orders, hardware stores or made masks. Sixty-eight percent of those with collaborative arrangements with local hospitals reported a lack of support and were unable to support women who needed transfer to hospital. The majority (93%) reported an increase in the number of enquiries relating to homebirth. Conclusion Privately practising midwives were resourceful, sought out information and were prepared. Support from the hospital sector was not always present. Lessons need to be learned especially in terms of integration, support, education and being included as part of the broader health system.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Maintaining infection control in the home environments can be more difficult and this is even more so during a pandemic when PPE is a heightened issue [ 23 ]. For midwives this may be weighing scales and bags for example that will be taken from house to house [ 22 , 24 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of planning for COVID-19 on private practising midwives in Australia

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, taking into account the opinions of the medical community who are concerned about the continued occurrence of infectious diseases [69,70], it is necessary to prepare operational guidelines and evaluation guidelines suitable for the situation and conditions of public spaces that can respond to infectious diseases in the future. In an existing study, an Australian case presented a manual on procedures, education and worker training, and a monitoring system to provide care to clients at the time of MERS [71], and the elderly at home in response to this COVID-19 As in the case of the publication of rules for providing meal services for children [72], specific operational guidelines and appropriate public space evaluation guidelines should be prepared so that public spaces can provide services even in an infectious disease situation. In addition, as the provision of non-face-to-face services such as phone safety checks increases, work standards for telecommuting, etc., should be revised together.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Has the COVID-19 Pandemic Affected the Perceptions of Public Space Employees?

Han

Bohannon

Kwon

2021

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study is to derive the subjective perception about COVID-19 of public space employees and to identify the characteristics of COVID-19 related issues. By using the Q-method, 24 workers in four public spaces located in Blacksburg, Virginia, USA were selected as P-Sample and Q-Sorting was conducted. Three types of perceptions were identified; Type 1 (Expansion of Non-Face-To-Face Service), Type 2 (Expansion of Professional Labor), and Type 3 (Expansion of Welfare Service Type). All three types recognized that when a confirmed case occurs in a public space, the right and safety of users or communities to know is important, and accurate information must be provided, because it is necessary to prevent the spread of infection. Above all, these results show another side of the COVID-19 situation, as the participants in this study are currently in charge of various tasks such as quarantine and service provision in public spaces. This study can be used as basic data for policy response and system improvement of public spaces in the event of an infectious disease such as COVID-19 in the future.

show abstract

“…Authors of a survey to assess awareness of evidence published in Cochrane Reviews reported low knowledge among nurses [57], indicating a disconnect between review recommendations and consistency of practice [17]. However, this lack of engagement may also extend to Clinical Practice Guidelines, with evidence suggesting nurses prefer to consult with colleagues or rely on their intuition or beliefs [58][59][60][61], rather than evidence-based recommendations to inform clinical decision-making. Additional barriers such as: a lack of basic research education [62]; time constraints in busy clinical settings [63,64]; and limited support from senior nurses with knowledge and experience in research [65], also contribute to nurses' negative attitude to pressure injury prevention [66,67], resulting in low-value care [58,68].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Importantly, this does not invalidate the relationship between the use of widely accepted practices to prevent and treat PI in health settings. Rather it signals the need for high quality research and ultimately greater emphasis on multi-faceted and tailored implementation strategies, that focus on methods to improve adoption, sustainment, and scale-up of interventions that bridge the gaps in clinicians' decision-making and practice [20,[59][60][61].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevention and treatment of pressure injuries: A meta-synthesis of Cochrane Reviews

Walker

Gillespie

McInnes

et al. 2020

Journal of Tissue Viability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: There are many high-quality systematic reviews to inform practice around pressure injury (PI) prevention and treatment. However, they are often unable to provide recommendations for practice and research due to low quality trials. Objectives: To evaluate current systematic review evidence on the prevention and treatment of PI. Methods: This meta-synthesis was guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Only Cochrane Reviews were included. Evidence from reviews was independently screened and assessed for risk of bias and certainty using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations by two authors, with a third resolving discrepancies. Methodological quality of included reviews was assessed using the second version of A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews, and a narrative synthesis undertaken. Results: Twenty-five Cochrane Reviews were included; eight for PI prevention and 19 for PI treatment. Prevention reviews included 102 studies (27,933 participants). Treatment reviews included 154 studies (over 16,936 participants). Three prevention reviews and nine treatment reviews reported risk of bias, judging the included trials as having low or very low certainty evidence. Two reviews reported moderate certainty evidence. Methodological quality of the systematic reviews was rated as high for eight reviews (7/19 for treatment and 1/6 for prevention). Recommendations for prevention included repositioning, nutrition and support surfaces. Recommendations for treatment focused on nutrition and repositioning. Conclusions: This meta-synthesis confirms the low-certainty of PI prevention and treatment trials, resulting in few recommendations to inform clinical practice. Generation of high-quality evidence on PI prevention and treatment is imperative.

show abstract

Infection prevention and control in home nursing: case study of four organisations in Australia

Cited by 12 publications

References 6 publications

The impact of planning for COVID-19 on private practising midwives in Australia

The impact of planning for COVID-19 on private practising midwives in Australia

How Has the COVID-19 Pandemic Affected the Perceptions of Public Space Employees?

Prevention and treatment of pressure injuries: A meta-synthesis of Cochrane Reviews

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About