Key stakeholders' perspectives: A gap analysis of hospital‐acquired pressure injuries

Abstract

IntroductionHospital‐acquired pressure injuries (HAPIs) are a global high‐stakes patient safety issue. Key stakeholder perspectives regarding their role and experiences with pressure injuries is critical as part of the solution to minimizing HAPI occurrence and attain sustainability.DesignA qualitative, descriptive approach provided multiple perspectives of key stakeholders to support the complexity of HAPI care. The qualitative data are a part of a mixed method convergent research study examining pressure injury prevention and management practices.MethodsNursing system theory, mixed method convergent design, and participatory action research methodologies were chosen to address both the gap analysis development and results, achieve collaborative comprehensiveness, and enable key stakeholder involvement throughout this HAPI prevention and management initiative. Participants were recruited and enrolled from a large Level I trauma hospital and the key stakeholders. Demographic information were collected prior to the individual interview. Focused interviews were conducted virtually using zoom technology. Qualitative data were analyzed using NVivo software and thematic analysis was confirmed across the co‐investigators for congruence and applicability to the research questions.ResultsQualitative interviews with 26 key stakeholders provided data to support and integrate a link with gap analysis results on the complex health issue of HAPIs. Specific barrier and recommendation themes identified interventions that could be prioritized. The 52 barrier and 52 recommendation themes/sub‐theme(s) respectively were organized by Donabedian (structure, process, and outcome) with structure elements the majority. The top three structure barrier themes involved equipment and standards for use, staff prevention education, and specialized health professionals. The top three structure recommendation themes involved specialized health professionals, equipment and standards for use, and an educational plan for those at risk or with HAPIs.ConclusionThe article provides findings from the qualitative portion of a mixed method study related to HAPIs. The qualitative findings associated with the gap analysis quantitative results, achieved the goal of the participatory action research key stakeholders' input into HAPI care and can be replicated internationally.Clinical RelevanceThe benefit of key stakeholder's involvement in solving a clinical problem is sustainability. A quantitative approach and integrating qualitative stakeholders' perspectives provide an in‐depth solution that will advance nursing capacity toward health care delivery and HAPI nursing science and policy development on a global level.