IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v19y2010i15-16p2207-2214.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An audit of the adequacy of acute wound care documentation of surgical inpatients

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Gartlan
  • Anne Smith
  • Sue Clennett
  • Denise Walshe
  • Ann Tomlinson‐Smith
  • Lory Boas
  • Andrew Robinson

Abstract

Aims and objectives. This study examined the degree to which acute wound care documentation by doctors and nurses meets the standards set in the Australian Wound Management Association guidelines, focusing on clinical history with regard to the wound, wound characteristics, evidence of a management plan and factors such as wound pain. Background. Wound care documentation is an important component of ‘best practice’ wound management. Evidence suggests that wound documentation by hospital staff is often ad hoc and incomplete. Design. Survey. Method. An audit of acute wound care documentation of inpatients admitted to a surgical ward was conducted in 2006 using the progress notes of 49 acute inpatients in a regional Australian hospital. The audit focused on wound documentation on admission and during dressing changes. Results. The findings demonstrated that, whereas doctors and nurses documented different aspects of the wound on admission, three quarters of patients had no documentation of wound margins and over half had no documentation of wound dimensions, exudate and wound bed. Whereas 122 dressing changes were documented by nurses and 103 by doctors, only 75 (60%) were reviewed by both medical and nursing staff. Doctors and nurses tended to document different aspects of dressing changes; however, in more than half the cases, there was no documentation about wound bed, margins, exudate and state of surrounding skin, whereas wound dimensions and skin sensation were recorded in less than 5%. Conclusion. Wound care documentation by doctors and nurses does not meet the Australian standard. The findings suggest there is ineffective communication about wound care in the multidisciplinary setting of the hospital. Relevance to clinical practice. The article concludes that hospitals need to engage medical and nursing staff in collaborative processes to identify the issues that underpin poor wound documentation and to implement interventions to ensure best practice is achieved.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Gartlan & Anne Smith & Sue Clennett & Denise Walshe & Ann Tomlinson‐Smith & Lory Boas & Andrew Robinson, 2010. "An audit of the adequacy of acute wound care documentation of surgical inpatients," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(15‐16), pages 2207-2214, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:19:y:2010:i:15-16:p:2207-2214
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03265.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03265.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03265.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chiew‐Jiat Rosalind Siah & Charmaine Childs & Chung King Chia & Kin Fong Karis Cheng, 2019. "An observational study of temperature and thermal images of surgical wounds for detecting delayed wound healing within four days after surgery," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(11-12), pages 2285-2295, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:19:y:2010:i:15-16:p:2207-2214. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.