IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v27y2018i11-12p2360-2372.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating fundamentals of care: The development of a unit‐level quality measurement and improvement programme

Author

Listed:
  • Jenny M Parr
  • Jeanette Bell
  • Jane Koziol‐McLain

Abstract

Aims and objectives The project aimed to develop a unit‐level quality measurement and improvement programme using evidence‐based fundamentals of care. Background Feedback from patients, families, whānau, staff and audit data in 2014 indicated variability in the delivery of fundamental aspects of care such as monitoring, nutrition, pain management and environmental cleanliness at a New Zealand District Health Board. Design A general inductive approach was used to explore the fundamentals of care and design a measurement and improvement programme, the Patient and Whānau Centred Care Standards (PWCCS), focused on fundamental care. Methods Five phases were used to explore the evidence, and design and test a measurement and improvement framework. Results Nine identified fundamental elements of care were used to define expected standards of care and develop and test a measurement and improvement framework. Four six‐monthly peer reviews have been undertaken since June 2015. Charge Nurse Managers used results to identify quality improvements. Significant improvement was demonstrated overall, in six of the 27 units, in seven of the nine standards and three of the four measures. In all, 89% (n = 24) of units improved their overall result. Conclusion The PWCCS measurement and improvement framework make visible nursing fundamentals of care in line with continuous quality improvement to increase quality of care. Relevance to clinical practice Delivering fundamentals of care is described by nurses as getting ?back to basics'. Patient and family feedback supports the centrality of fundamentals of care to their hospital experience. Implementing a unit‐level fundamentals of care quality measurement and improvement programme clarifies expected standards of care, highlights the contribution of fundamentals of care to quality and provides a mechanism for ongoing improvements.

Suggested Citation

  • Jenny M Parr & Jeanette Bell & Jane Koziol‐McLain, 2018. "Evaluating fundamentals of care: The development of a unit‐level quality measurement and improvement programme," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(11-12), pages 2360-2372, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:27:y:2018:i:11-12:p:2360-2372
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14250
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14250
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.14250?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. Tanya McCance & Lorna Telford & Julie Wilson & Olive MacLeod & Audrey Dowd, 2012. "Identifying key performance indicators for nursing and midwifery care using a consensus approach," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(7‐8), pages 1145-1154, April.
    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. Alexandra Mudd & Rebecca Feo & Tiffany Conroy & Alison Kitson, 2020. "Where and how does fundamental care fit within seminal nursing theories: A narrative review and synthesis of key nursing concepts," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(19-20), pages 3652-3666, October.
    2. Alvisa Palese & Jessica Longhini & Matteo Danielis, 2021. "To what extent Unfinished Nursing Care tools coincide with the discrete elements of The Fundamentals of Care Framework? A comparative analysis based on a systematic review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1-2), pages 239-265, January.

    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. Tanya McCance & Jack Hastings & Hilda Dowler, 2015. "Evaluating the use of key performance indicators to evidence the patient experience," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(21-22), pages 3084-3094, November.
    2. Tanya McCance & Val Wilson & Kelly Kornman, 2016. "Paediatric International Nursing Study: using person‐centred key performance indicators to benchmark children's services," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(13-14), pages 2018-2027, July.

    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:27:y:2018:i:11-12:p:2360-2372. 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.