IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v27y2018i3-4pe402-e411.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nurses’ clinical reasoning practices that support safe medication administration: An integrative review of the literature

Author

Listed:
  • Emily Rohde
  • Elizabeth Domm

Abstract

Aims and objectives To review the current literature about nurses’ clinical reasoning practices that support safe medication administration. Background The literature about medication administration frequently focuses on avoiding medication errors. Nurses’ clinical reasoning used during medication administration to maintain medication safety receives less attention in the literature. As healthcare professionals, nurses work closely with patients, assessing and intervening to promote mediation safety prior to, during and after medication administration. They also provide discharge teaching about using medication safely. Nurses’ clinical reasoning and practices that support medication safety are often invisible when the focus is medication errors avoidance. Design An integrative literature review was guided by Whittemore and Knafl's (Journal of Advanced Nursing, 5, 2005 and 546) five‐stage review of the 11 articles that met review criteria. This review is modelled after Gaffney et al.'s (Journal of Clinical Nursing, 25, 2016 and 906) integrative review on medical error recovery. Methods Health databases were accessed and systematically searched for research reporting nurses’ clinical reasoning practices that supported safe medication administration. The level and quality of evidence of the included research articles were assessed using The Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence‐Based Practice Rating Scale©. Results Nurses have a central role in safe medication administration, including but not limited to risk awareness about the potential for medication errors. Nurses assess patients and their medication and use knowledge and clinical reasoning to administer medication safely. Results indicated nurses’ use of clinical reasoning to maintain safe medication administration was inadequately articulated in 10 of 11 studies reviewed. Conclusion Nurses are primarily responsible for safe medication administration. Nurses draw from their foundational knowledge of patient conditions and organisational processes and use clinical reasoning that supports safe medication practice. There was minimal evidence clearly articulating nurses’ clinical reasoning used to support medication safety. Relevance to clinical practice This review focused on finding evidence of nurses’ clinical reasoning that supported safe medication administration.

Suggested Citation

  • Emily Rohde & Elizabeth Domm, 2018. "Nurses’ clinical reasoning practices that support safe medication administration: An integrative review of the literature," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3-4), pages 402-411, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:27:y:2018:i:3-4:p:e402-e411
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14077
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14077
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.14077?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. Virpi Sulosaari & Riitta Suhonen & Helena Leino‐Kilpi, 2011. "An integrative review of the literature on registered nurses’ medication competence," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(3‐4), pages 464-478, February.
    2. Jessica Brier & Moalem Carolyn & Marsha Haverly & Mary Ellen Januario & Cynthia Padula & Ahuva Tal & Henia Triosh, 2015. "Knowing ‘something is not right’ is beyond intuition: development of a clinical algorithm to enhance surveillance and assist nurses to organise and communicate clinical findings," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(5-6), pages 832-843, March.
    3. Theresa A Gaffney & Barbara J Hatcher & Renee Milligan, 2016. "Nurses' role in medical error recovery: an integrative review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(7-8), pages 906-917, April.
    4. Laurene Aydon & Yvonne Hauck & Margo Zimmer & Jamee Murdoch, 2016. "Factors influencing a nurse's decision to question medication administration in a neonatal clinical care unit," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(17-18), pages 2468-2477, September.
    5. Louise Folkmann & Janet Rankin, 2010. "Nurses’ medication work: what do nurses know?," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(21‐22), pages 3218-3226, November.
    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. Tinne Dilles & Jana Heczkova & Styliani Tziaferi & Ann Karin Helgesen & Vigdis Abrahamsen Grøndahl & Bart Van Rompaey & Carolien G. Sino & Sue Jordan, 2021. "Nurses and Pharmaceutical Care: Interprofessional, Evidence-Based Working to Improve Patient Care and Outcomes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-11, June.

    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. Kari Toverud Jensen & Unni Knutstad & Tonks N. Fawcett, 2018. "The challenge of the biosciences in nurse education: A literature review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(9-10), pages 1793-1802, May.
    2. Pilar Fuster-Linares & Cristina Alfonso-Arias & Alberto Gallart Fernández-Puebla & Encarna Rodríguez-Higueras & Silvia García-Mayor & Isabel Font-Jimenez & Mireia Llaurado-Serra, 2022. "Assessing Nursing Students’ Self-Perceptions about Safe Medication Management: Design and Validation of a Tool, the NURSPeM," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-15, April.
    3. Claire Foley & Maura Dowling, 2019. "How do nurses use the early warning score in their practice? A case study from an acute medical unit," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(7-8), pages 1183-1192, April.
    4. Noort, Mark C. & Reader, Tom W. & Gillespie, Alex, 2019. "Speaking up to prevent harm: a systematic review of the safety voice literature," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 100774, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Mojtaba Vaismoradi & Susanna Tella & Patricia A. Logan & Jayden Khakurel & Flores Vizcaya-Moreno, 2020. "Nurses’ Adherence to Patient Safety Principles: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-15, 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:e402-e411. 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.