Introduction
The research article under review is entitled “A Quantitative Assessment of Patient and Nurse Outcomes of Bedside Nursing Report Implementation” by Sand-Jecklin & Sherman (2014). The purpose of the research article is to quantify the impact of a mixed type of bedside report on nurse and patient outcomes in a hospital. Sand-Jecklin and Sherman (2014) outline that bedside nursing report is beneficial because it informs patients, improves patient satisfaction, enhances patient involvement, and improves nurse teamwork. Quantification of the outcomes of the mixed type of bedside report has great significance to nursing because it will aid the improvement of nursing satisfaction and patient outcomes in hospitals. Implementation of the mixed type of bedside report had numerous benefits to both patients and nurses for it reduced falls, enhanced nursing care, improved communication, promoted patient involvement, encouraged teamwork, and assured accountability.
Research Question
The research question of the articles is that what is the impact of the mixed type of bedside report on nurse and patient outcomes? The research article quantified the impact of the mixed type of bedside report using a five-point Likert scale in measuring responses of patients and nurses (Sand-Jecklin & Sherman, 2014). Quantification of impact was essential to allow quantitative analysis of outcomes and determination of their significance in nursing care. The question stems from the realization that most of the nurses’ communications happen at bedside and miscommunications usually result in one of the foremost causes of medical errors and near-miss events. Moreover, ample literature has concentrated on the implementation and report processes of bedside nursing report, and thus, it has neglected the process of quantification. As a new practice, the research question focused on the impact of the mixed type of bedside reporting.
Research Design
The study employed the quasi-experimental design in quantifying the impact of the mixed type of bedside report on nurses and patients. The design allowed the collection of data in three phases, namely, baseline, 3 months, and 13 months (Sand-Jecklin & Sherman, 2014). The strengths of quasi-experimental design are that it is cheap and easy to implement, does not have significant ethical issues, disallows manipulations, diminishes threats to ecological validity, permits longitudinal study that long durations, and enhances external validity of the findings (DeRue, 2012). However, the weaknesses are that the design is prone to confounders, lacks randomization, and it is hard to establish causation. Based on strengths and weaknesses, the author chose the design because it is cheap, easy to implement, has no significant ethical issues, and permits a longitudinal study of patients and nurses.
Sample Size
The used variable sample sizes of patients and nurses, which varied according to the phases of the study. At baseline, 3 months, and 13 months phases, the sample sizes were 233, 157, and 154 patients respectively (Sand-Jecklin & Sherman, 2014). The sample sizes of nurses were 148, 98, and 54 nurses at baseline, 3-months, and 13-months phases correspondingly (Sand-Jecklin & Sherman, 2014). Since the study was done in a single hospital, Mid-Atlantic University Hospital, the sample sizes were adequate for they represented a significant proportion of nurses and patients. Therefore, due to an adequate sample size, the findings of the study have high external validity.
Data Collection Method
The authors collected data from nurses and patients by administering surveys to them. Patient Views on Nursing Care and Nursing Assessment of Shift Report were survey tools used in collecting data from patients and nurses respectively ((Sand-Jecklin & Sherman, 2014). The study sought ethical approval from the internal review board, but it does not delineate ethical considerations tackled.
Limitations of the Study
The limitations are that the study employed a convenience method of sampling, surveys did not have primary identifiers, and responses had some inconsistencies (Sand-Jecklin & Sherman, 2014). Subsequent studies should overcome underrepresentation by employing a probability method of sampling, restrict surveys by assigning primary identifiers, and include items in surveys to quantify inconsistencies. Limitations are important for they enable readers to understand the validity and reliability of findings and allow researchers to overcome them in their future studies.
Findings of the Study
The findings of the study adequately answered the research question for they quantified and outlined outcomes emanating from the implementation of the mixed type of bedside nursing report. According to Sand-Jecklin and Sherman (2014), implementation of the mixed type of bedside report reduced falls, enhanced nursing care, improved communication, promoted patient involvement, encouraged teamwork, and assured accountability. These findings are credible because the study used scientific design and inferential statistics in assessing the degree of outcomes.
Summary
Quantitative assessment of the impact of the mixed bedside report is essential because most nurses’ communications happen at the bedside. According to literature, the bedside nursing report is beneficial as it informs patients, improves patient satisfaction, enhances patient involvement, and improves nurse teamwork. As the research question aimed to determine the impact of the mixed nursing report on nursing and patient outcomes, the study found out that it reduced falls, enhanced nursing care, improved communication, promoted patient involvement, encouraged teamwork, and assured accountability (Sand-Jecklin & Sherman, 2014). Since the study provided valid and reliable findings, which are adequately strong to suggest an alteration of practice, the probability of implementing them in the nursing practice is high. Thus, the study highlights that the mixed type of bedside nurse reporting has a significant positive impact on patient and nurse outcomes.
References
DeRue, S. (2012). A quasi-experimental study of after-event reviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(5), 997-1015. Web.
Sand-Jecklin, K., & Sherman, J. (2014). A quantitative assessment of patient and nurse outcomes of bedside nursing report implementation. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 23(19/20), 2854-2863. Web.