IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v25y2016i9-10p1262-1272.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A qualitative exploration of intentional nursing round models in the emergency department setting: investigating the barriers to their use and success

Author

Listed:
  • Kate Kirk
  • Ros Kane

Abstract

Aims and objectives This research aimed to investigate the use of intentional rounding within in the emergency department setting through exploration of the staff nurse experience. The focus was its implementation at a large teaching hospital in England. Background Research into the use of intentional rounding in any area of practice is minimal in the UK; however, a broader evidence base comes from America. The majority of this research supports the notion of intentional rounding for improved patient care and outcomes. Research from the UK is generally more contested. There is less literature on using intentional rounding specifically in the emergency department setting. Design Qualitative methodological approach. Methods Semi‐structured interviews (n = 5) were completed with staff nurses working within an emergency department. A purposive sampling technique was used for recruitment. The data was then analysed using ‘Framework Method of Qualitative Analysis’ (Spencer et al. 2014). Results The findings were categorised into four headings: (1) Improved patient experience, (2) Current unmanageability, (3) Adapting for the emergency department, (4) Benefits on achieving quality indicators and targets. Conclusion The findings show that although staff felt the introduction of intentional rounding techniques could lead to improvements in patient safety and overall care experience, they also identified a range of difficulties and adaptations needed to ensure its success within this acute care environment. Relevance to clinical practice The research offers an insight into the staff's perceptions of using intentional rounding and also explains the practical difficulties faced by the nursing staff with potential suggestions that may help to address these problems. Benefits include more open communication between staff and patients and potentially more timely response to patient need, which positively impacts levels of safety and satisfaction. Barriers include lack of staff engagement, and the environmental factors and pressures, within the ED setting.

Suggested Citation

  • Kate Kirk & Ros Kane, 2016. "A qualitative exploration of intentional nursing round models in the emergency department setting: investigating the barriers to their use and success," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(9-10), pages 1262-1272, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:25:y:2016:i:9-10:p:1262-1272
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13150
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13150
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.13150?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. Fatemeh Mohammadipour & Foroozan Atashzadeh‐Shoorideh & Soroor Parvizy & Meimanat Hosseini, 2017. "An explanatory study on the concept of nursing presence from the perspective of patients admitted to hospitals," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(23-24), pages 4313-4324, December.
    2. Leah East & Dianne Targett & Hamish Yeates & Elizabeth Ryan & Louisa Quiddington & Cindy Woods, 2020. "Nurse and patient satisfaction with intentional rounding in a rural Australian setting," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(7-8), pages 1365-1371, April.

    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:25:y:2016:i:9-10:p:1262-1272. 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.