Luiking Marie-Louise, van Linge Roland, Bras Leo, Grypdonck Maria, Aarts Leon
Intensive Care Unit, Sint Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
Department of Nursing Science, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Nurs Crit Care. 2016 May;21(3):127-36. doi: 10.1111/nicc.12056. Epub 2015 Oct 23.
Nurses' participation in decisions about new care procedures and protocols is potentially of benefit for patient outcomes. Whether nurses' participation in decisions is allowed in the implementation of innovations depends on the implementation approach used for the introduction. A planned change implementation approach does not allow it, an emergent change implementation approach does.
To compare a planned change and an emergent change implementation approach to introduce an intensive insulin therapy to an intensive care unit (ICU).
A prospective comparative study in an ICU in the Netherlands of two teams of nurses using either implementation approach.
Pre-introduction of the comparability of the two teams was assessed. The nurse compliance to the protocol was assessed as being nurses' behaviour according to the protocol and leading to acceptable glucose values. The effectiveness of the implementation was assessed by measuring the percentage of patients' glucose values within the target range, the occurrence of hypoglycaemic events and the time to glucose value normalization. Data were collected from December 2007 till January 2009.
In the emergent change approach team there was better nurse compliance measurements than in the planned change approach team (83.5% vs 66,8% conform protocol), a better percentage of glucose values in the target range (53,5% vs 52.8%) and a shorter time to glucose value normalization.
The implementation approach allowing nurse participation was associated with better nurse compliance and patient outcome measurements. The implementation approach did not conflict with introducing an evidence-based innovation. It was also associated with more effective adaptation of the protocol to changing circumstances.
When a new treatment requires adaptability to changing circumstances to be most effective, nurses' participation in decisions about the implementation of the treatment should be considered.
护士参与有关新护理程序和方案的决策可能对患者预后有益。在创新实施过程中是否允许护士参与决策取决于所采用的引入实施方法。计划性变革实施方法不允许,而紧急性变革实施方法则允许。
比较计划性变革和紧急性变革实施方法在重症监护病房(ICU)引入强化胰岛素治疗的情况。
在荷兰一家ICU对两组采用不同实施方法的护士进行前瞻性比较研究。
评估引入前两组的可比性。将护士对方案的依从性评估为护士按照方案的行为并导致可接受的血糖值。通过测量患者血糖值在目标范围内的百分比、低血糖事件的发生率以及血糖值恢复正常的时间来评估实施的有效性。数据收集时间为2007年12月至2009年1月。
在紧急性变革方法组中,护士依从性测量结果优于计划性变革方法组(符合方案的比例分别为83.5%和66.8%),目标范围内血糖值的百分比更高(分别为53.5%和52.8%),血糖值恢复正常的时间更短。
允许护士参与的实施方法与更好的护士依从性和患者预后测量结果相关。该实施方法与引入循证创新并不冲突。它还与使方案更有效地适应不断变化的情况相关。
当一种新治疗需要适应不断变化的情况以达到最佳效果时,应考虑护士参与有关该治疗实施的决策。