IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v23y2014i17-18p2618-2627.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Wound care practices: a survey of acute care nurses

Author

Listed:
  • Brigid M Gillespie
  • Wendy Chaboyer
  • Pamela Allen
  • Nicola Morely
  • Paul Nieuwenhoven

Abstract

Aims and objectives To describe the self‐reported wound care practices of acute care nurses practising in a large metropolitan hospital in Queensland, Australia. Background Wound infections occur in up to 30% of surgical procedures and are the third most commonly reported hospital‐acquired infection. The growing complexity and cost of wound care demand that nurses use wound care knowledge based on best practice guidelines. Design Descriptive cross‐sectional survey design. Methods A convenience sample of 250 medical and surgical nurses working in an acute care facility was invited to complete a 42‐item survey. The survey was based on an extensive literature review and an environmental scan of wound care issues in major hospitals, Australia. Results The survey was completed by 120 acute care nurses with a response rate of 48%. Ninety (75·6%) respondents reported that ‘wound appearance’ was the most important factor guiding their choice of dressing product. Only 6 (5·0%) respondents considered the cost of a dressing product ‘highly important’. Fifty‐nine (50·4%) respondents reported being ‘unaware’ of the national standards pertaining to wound management, and only 41 (34·7%) respondents reported that their knowledge of wound products was ‘good’ or ‘excellent’. The majority (n = 89, 75·4%) of respondents used the hospital's wound care specialist nurses as the primary source of information in regard to managing acute wounds. Conclusions Although acute care nurses have a sound knowledge of wound healing processes, it appears that many do not use the recommended clinical guideline pertaining to wound care. Relevance to clinical practice While it is important for nurses to detect early wound complications, treatment plans based on wound assessments need to be informed by current clinical guidelines. In implementing the guideline, it is essential to first identify barriers and facilitators to knowledge transfer.

Suggested Citation

  • Brigid M Gillespie & Wendy Chaboyer & Pamela Allen & Nicola Morely & Paul Nieuwenhoven, 2014. "Wound care practices: a survey of acute care nurses," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(17-18), pages 2618-2627, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:23:y:2014:i:17-18:p:2618-2627
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.12479
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.12479
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.12479?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. Sriyani A. Kumarasinghe & Priyadarshika Hettiarachchi & Sudharshani Wasalathanthri, 2018. "Nurses' knowledge on diabetic foot ulcer disease and their attitudes towards patients affected: A cross‐sectional institution‐based study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1-2), pages 203-212, January.
    2. Frances Lin & Brigid M. Gillespie & Wendy Chaboyer & Yu Li & Karen Whitelock & Nicola Morley & Shirley Morrissey & Frances O’Callaghan & Andrea P. Marshall, 2019. "Preventing surgical site infections: Facilitators and barriers to nurses’ adherence to clinical practice guidelines—A qualitative study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(9-10), pages 1643-1652, May.

    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:23:y:2014:i:17-18:p:2618-2627. 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.