IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v26y2017i19-20p3200-3211.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Getting evidence‐based pressure ulcer prevention into practice: a process evaluation of a multifaceted intervention in a hospital setting

Author

Listed:
  • Eva Sving
  • Lennart Fredriksson
  • Lena Gunningberg
  • Anna‐Greta Mamhidir

Abstract

Aims and objectives To describe registered nurses’, assistant nurses’ and first‐line managers’ experiences and perceptions of a multifaceted hospital setting intervention focused on implementing evidence‐based pressure ulcer prevention. Background Pressure ulcer prevention is deficient. Different models exist to support implementation of evidence‐based care. Little is known about implementation processes. Design A descriptive qualitative approach. Method Five focus‐group nurse interviews and five individual first‐line manager interviews were conducted at five Swedish hospital units. Qualitative content analysis was used. Result The findings support that the intervention and the implementation process changed the understanding and way of working with pressure ulcer prevention: from treating to preventing. This became possible as ‘Changed understanding enables changed actions – through one's own performance and reflection on pressure ulcer prevention’. Having a common outlook on pressure ulcer prevention, easy access to pressure‐reducing equipment, and external and internal facilitator support were described as important factors for changed practices. Bedside support, feedback and discussions on current results increased the awareness of needed improvements. Conclusion The multifaceted intervention approach and the participants’ positive attitudes seemed to be crucial for changing understanding and working more preventatively. The strategies used and the skills of the facilitators need to be tailored to the problems surrounding the context. Feedback discussions among the staff regarding the results of the care provided also appear to be vital. Relevance to clinical practice It is crucial that dedicated facilitators are involved to promote the implementation process. A preventative mindset should be strived for. Creating an implementation plan with an outcome and a process evaluation should be emphasised. It is important to give the staff regular feedback on the quality of care and on those occasions allocate time for discussion and reflection.

Suggested Citation

  • Eva Sving & Lennart Fredriksson & Lena Gunningberg & Anna‐Greta Mamhidir, 2017. "Getting evidence‐based pressure ulcer prevention into practice: a process evaluation of a multifaceted intervention in a hospital setting," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(19-20), pages 3200-3211, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:26:y:2017:i:19-20:p:3200-3211
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13668
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13668
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.13668?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zena Moore & Seamus Cowman, 2012. "Pressure ulcer prevalence and prevention practices in care of the older person in the Republic of Ireland," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(3‐4), pages 362-371, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jocelyn Jie Min Tan & Michelle Tze Min Cheng & Norasyikin Bte Hassan & Honggu He & Wenru Wang, 2020. "Nurses' perception and experiences towards medical device‐related pressure injuries: A qualitative study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(13-14), pages 2455-2465, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tove E Børsting & Christine R Tvedt & Ingrid J Skogestad & Tove I Granheim & Caryl L Gay & Anners Lerdal, 2018. "Prevalence of pressure ulcer and associated risk factors in middle‐ and older‐aged medical inpatients in Norway," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3-4), pages 535-543, February.
    2. Lorenzo Righi & Aimad Ourahmoune & Nadine Béné & Anne-Claire Rae & Delphine S Courvoisier & Pierre Chopard, 2020. "Effects of a pressure-ulcer audit and feedback regional programme at 1 and 2 years in nursing homes: A prospective longitudinal study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-12, May.
    3. Ivan Mwebaza & Godfrey Katende & Sara Groves & Joyce Nankumbi, 2014. "Nurses’ Knowledge, Practices, and Barriers in Care of Patients with Pressure Ulcers in a Ugandan Teaching Hospital," Nursing Research and Practice, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-6, February.
    4. Qing Zhou & Ting Yu & Yuan Liu & Ruifen Shi & Suping Tian & Chaoxia Yang & Huaxiu Gan & Yanying Zhu & Xia Liang & Ling Wang & Zhenhua Wu & Jinping Huang & Ailing Hu, 2018. "The prevalence and specific characteristics of hospitalised pressure ulcer patients: A multicentre cross‐sectional study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3-4), pages 694-704, 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:26:y:2017:i:19-20:p:3200-3211. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.