Search

To investigate how nursing experts and experts from other health professions understand the concept of rationing/missed/unfinished nursing care and how this is compared at a cross-cultural level.The mixed methods descriptive study.The semi-structured questionnaires were sent to the sample of 45 scholars and practitioners from 26 countries. Data were collected from November 2017-February 2018.Assigning average cultural values to participants from each country revealed three cultural groups: high individualism-high masculinity, high individualism-low masculinity and low individualism-medium masculinity. Content analysis of the findings revealed three main themes, which were identified across cultural clusters: (a) projecting blame for the phenomenon: Blaming the nurse versus blaming the system; (b) intentionality versus unintentionality; and (c) focus on nurses in comparison to focus on patients.Consistent differences in the understanding of missed nursing care can be understood in line with the nation's standing on two main cultural values: individualism and masculinity.The findings call for scholars' caution in interpreting missed nursing care from different cultures, or in comparing levels and types of missed nursing tasks across nations. The findings further indicated that mimicking interventions to limit missed nursing care from one cultural context to the other might be ineffective. Interventions to mitigate the phenomenon should be implemented thoughtfully, considering the cultural aspects.目的: 调查护理专家和其他医疗卫生专家如何理解定量护理、过失护理和未完成护理的概念以及跨文化层面是如何比较这些概念的。 设计: 混合方法描述性研究。 方法: 这些半结构化的问卷被发送给了实验对象--来自26个国家的45位学者和医生。搜集了从2017年十一月至2018年二月的数据。 结果: 将平均文化价值观分配给各个国家的参与者,从而得到了三个文化群体:高个人主义-高男子气概、高个人主义-低男子气概以及低个人主义-高男子气概。调查结果的内容分析揭示了三个跨文化群体认同的主题:(a)将这一现象归咎于谁:责备护士还是责备系统;(b)故意还是无意;以及(c)关注护理人员还是关注病人。 结论: 对过失护理理解的一致差异可以理解为与国家长期的两种主要文化价值观有关:个人主义和男子气概。 影响: 研究结果呼吁学者们谨慎解释不同文化背景下的过失护理或者是比较各国过失护理任务的程度和类型。研究结果进一步表明一个文化环境模仿另一个文化环境限制过失护理的干预措施可能是无效的。考虑到文化差异,应当谨慎采取干预措施来缓和这种现象。.

Aims and objectives This study explores the reasons nurses identify missed care and what factors account for this variance in nursing practice. Second, the study seeks to understand if the identified reasons behind missed care interact with one another and form a multidimensional construct. Background This study draws on the results of previous research conducted by Kalisch in developing the MISSCARE research survey tool and now applies it to an Australian context. Design This study engages a nonexperimental exploratory approach where 16 latent variables are identified and estimated using structural equation modelling to determine the capacity each of these factors has in predicting the reasons for reported missed nursing care. Methods Data were obtained from an electronic survey sent to nursing members of the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation of South Australia. A self-report, Likert-type instrument was used to capture the strength and direction of consensus derived from a sample of 289 nurses and midwives. Results/Findings Eight variables were identified as having direct predictor effects as to why nursing care was being missed, and included shift type, nursing resource allocation, health professional communication, workload intensity, workload predictability, the nurses' satisfaction with their current job and their intention to remain working. Additional indirect effects of other variables explained 34% of the variance of the total scores for why nursing care was reported as being missed. Conclusion Historically, the MISSCARE survey has identified and quantified what types of nursing care is missed. This paper takes this concept further by producing an interactional model identifying the effects different variables have on why nursing care is missed. Relevance to clinical practice These Australian findings not only contribute to other international studies that identify why nursing care is omitted, it provides a framework for why reported episodes of missed care can be predicted and subsequently addressed.