IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v24y2015i3-4p536-545.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of the suitability of root cause analysis frameworks for the investigation of community‐acquired pressure ulcers: a systematic review and documentary analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Caroline McGraw
  • Vari M Drennan

Abstract

Aims and objectives To evaluate the suitability of root cause analysis frameworks for the investigation of community‐acquired pressure ulcers. The objective was to identify the extent to which these frameworks take account of the setting where the ulcer originated as being the person's home rather than a hospital setting. Background Pressure ulcers involving full‐thickness skin loss are increasingly being regarded as indicators of nursing patient safety failure, requiring investigation using root cause analysis frameworks. Evidence suggests that root cause analysis frameworks developed in hospital settings ignore the unique dimensions of risk in home healthcare settings. Design and methods A systematic literature review and documentary analysis of frameworks used to investigate community‐acquired grade three and four pressure ulcers by home nursing services in England. Results No published papers were identified for inclusion in the review. Fifteen patient safety investigative frameworks were collected and analysed. Twelve of the retrieved frameworks were intended for the investigation of community‐acquired pressure ulcers; seven of which took account of the setting where the ulcer originated as being the patient's home. Conclusion This study provides evidence to suggest that many of the root cause analysis frameworks used to investigate community‐acquired pressure ulcers in England are unsuitable for this purpose. Relevance to clinical practice This study provides researchers and practitioners with evidence of the need to develop appropriate home nursing root cause analysis frameworks to investigate community‐acquired pressure ulcers.

Suggested Citation

  • Caroline McGraw & Vari M Drennan, 2015. "Evaluation of the suitability of root cause analysis frameworks for the investigation of community‐acquired pressure ulcers: a systematic review and documentary analysis," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3-4), pages 536-545, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:24:y:2015:i:3-4:p:536-545
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.12644
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.12644
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.12644?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. Duncan Smith & Mandeep Sekhon & Jill J. Francis & Leanne M. Aitken, 2019. "How actionable are staff behaviours specified in policy documents? A document analysis of protocols for managing deteriorating patients," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(21-22), pages 4139-4149, November.
    2. Caroline A. McGraw, 2019. "Nurses’ perceptions of the root causes of community‐acquired pressure ulcers: Application of the Model for Examining Safety and Quality Concerns in Home Healthcare," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(3-4), pages 575-588, February.

    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:24:y:2015:i:3-4:p:536-545. 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.