IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v27y2018i3-4p705-714.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stuck in tradition‐A qualitative study on barriers for implementation of evidence‐based nutritional care perceived by nursing staff

Author

Listed:
  • Malene Barfod O′Connell
  • Pia Søe Jensen
  • Signe Lindgård Andersen
  • Cecilia Fernbrant
  • Vibeke Nørholm
  • Helle Vendel Petersen

Abstract

Aims and objectives To explore the barriers for nutritional care as perceived by nursing staff at an acute orthopaedic ward, aiming to implement evidence‐based nutritional care. Background Previous studies indicate that nurses recognise nutritional care as important, but interventions are often lacking. These studies show that a range of barriers influence the attempt to optimise nutritional care. Before the implementation of evidence‐based nutritional care, we examined barriers for nutritional care among the nursing staff. Design Qualitative study. Methods Four focus groups with thirteen members of the nursing staff were interviewed between October 2013–June 2014. The interview guide was designed according to the Theoretical Domains Framework. The interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis. Results Three main categories emerged: lacking common practice, failing to initiate treatment and struggling with existing resources. The nursing staff was lacking both knowledge and common practice regarding nutritional care. They felt they protected patient autonomy by accepting patient′s reluctance to eat or getting a feeding tube. The lack of nutritional focus from doctors decreased the nursing staffs focus leading to nonoptimal nutritional treatment. Competing priorities, physical setting and limited nutritional supplements were believed to hinder nutritional care. Conclusion The results suggest that nutritional care is in a transitional state from experience‐ to evidence‐based practice. Barriers for nutritional care are grounded in lack of knowledge among nursing staff and insufficient collaboration between nursing staff and the doctors. There is a need for nutritional education for the nursing staff and better support from the organisation to help nursing staff provide evidence‐based nutritional care. Relevance to clinical practice This study contributes with valuable knowledge before the implementation of evidence‐based nutritional care. The study provides an understanding of barriers for nutritional care and presents explanations to why nutritional care has failed to become an integrated part of the daily treatment and care.

Suggested Citation

  • Malene Barfod O′Connell & Pia Søe Jensen & Signe Lindgård Andersen & Cecilia Fernbrant & Vibeke Nørholm & Helle Vendel Petersen, 2018. "Stuck in tradition‐A qualitative study on barriers for implementation of evidence‐based nutritional care perceived by nursing staff," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3-4), pages 705-714, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:27:y:2018:i:3-4:p:705-714
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14020
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.14020?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. Helene Dahl Eide & Kristin Halvorsen & Kari Almendingen, 2015. "Barriers to nutritional care for the undernourished hospitalised elderly: perspectives of nurses," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(5-6), pages 696-706, March.
    2. Diana Jefferies & Maree Johnson & Jennifer Ravens, 2011. "Nurturing and nourishing: the nurses’ role in nutritional care," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(3‐4), pages 317-330, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Helene Kjøllesdal Eide & Jūratė Šaltytė Benth & Kjersti Sortland & Kristin Halvorsen & Kari Almendingen, 2016. "Are Nutritional Care Adequate for Elderly Hospitalized Patients? A Cross-Sectional Study," SAGE Open, , vol. 6(4), pages 21582440166, December.
    2. Lene Odgaard & Lena Aadal & Marianne Eskildsen & Ingrid Poulsen, 2020. "Using clinical quality databases to monitor the quality of fundamental care: Example with weight status after severe traumatic brain injury," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(11-12), pages 2031-2038, June.
    3. Harm H.J. van Noort & Roelof G.A. Ettema & Hester Vermeulen & Getty Huisman‐de Waal & the Basic Care Revisited Group (BCR), 2019. "Outpatient preoperative oral nutritional support for undernourished surgical patients: A systematic review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1-2), pages 7-19, January.
    4. Ella Ottrey & Claire Palermo & Catherine E. Huggins & Judi Porter, 2018. "Exploring staff perceptions and experiences of volunteers and visitors on the hospital ward at mealtimes using an ethnographic approach," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(7-8), pages 1571-1579, April.
    5. Kjersti Sortland & Kristin Halvorsen & Jūratė Šaltytė Benth & Kari Almendingen, 2020. "Involving nursing students into clinical research projects: Reliability of data and experiences of students?," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(19-20), pages 3860-3869, October.
    6. Pia Søe Jensen & Sue M Green & Janne Petersen & Ove Andersen & Ingrid Poulsen, 2018. "Perceptions and experiences of nutritional care following the overwhelming experience of lower extremity amputation: A qualitative study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(5-6), pages 808-819, March.

    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:3-4:p:705-714. 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.