IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v29y2020i17-18p3527-3540.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Contextualising missed care in two healthcare inquiries using a socio‐ecological systems approach

Author

Listed:
  • Amanda Phelan
  • Marcia Kirwan

Abstract

Aims and objectives To examine missed care within two patient safety public inquiries using a socio‐ecological model. Background Missed care is a care which has been omitted or rendered incomplete. Possible outcomes of missed care have been identified including poor patient outcomes such as higher mortality rates, reduced care quality and lower patient satisfaction, job dissatisfaction, staff burnout and higher attrition rates. Design A qualitative design, specifically document analysis, was used to review two serious case reviews. Methods Between August–December 2018, two public patient safety inquiries were examined using a document analysis method. Both inquiries are based in acute hospital care settings of nursing (UK) and midwifery (Ireland). The Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist provided a framework to report the study methods, context, findings, analysis and interpretation. Results Findings highlighted instances of missed care related to practice which contributed to poor patient outcomes. Missed care was located within contingency factors, such as unintended negative patient health and safety outcomes in multiple system levels which resulted in care deficits. Conclusions A socio‐ecological model enabled consideration of how multi‐system deficits combine to impact nursing and midwifery care delivery. To tackle current and future practice challenges, broader contextual issues that influence front‐line cases should be identified and addressed before they create conditions which result in substandard care. Relevance to clinical practice This paper adds to the scholarship on missed care by incorporating a greater contextual lens. Findings suggest that some factors contributing to missed care events may be systemic in origin. Practice, policy, research and education should foster nurses’ and midwives’ review of the totality of influencing factors impacting missed care and care deficits. Consequently, early warning signs and proactive responses at a system level should be inherent in all settings that nurses’ and midwives’ practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Amanda Phelan & Marcia Kirwan, 2020. "Contextualising missed care in two healthcare inquiries using a socio‐ecological systems approach," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(17-18), pages 3527-3540, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:29:y:2020:i:17-18:p:3527-3540
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.15391
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15391
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.15391?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. Annamaria Bagnasco & Fiona Timmins & Giuseppe Aleo & Loredana Sasso, 2018. "Double Jeopardy – Missed care for the vulnerable in community settings," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(21-22), pages 3827-3829, 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. Christopher Mikton & Marie Beaulieu & Yongjie Yon & Julien Cadieux Genesse & Kevin St‐Martin & Mark Byrne & Amanda Phelan & Jennifer Storey & Michaela Rogers & Fiona Campbell & Parveen Ali & David Bur, 2022. "PROTOCOL: Global elder abuse: A mega‐map of systematic reviews on prevalence, consequences, risk and protective factors and interventions," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), 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.

      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:29:y:2020:i:17-18:p:3527-3540. 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.