Lynn M Soban1, Linda Kim2, Anita H Yuan3, Rebecca S Miltner4. 1. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Nursing Research and Development, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 2. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Los Angeles Area Health Service Research (LAAHSR) Training Program, Department of Health Policy & Management, University of California School of Public Health, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 3. VA HSR&D Center for the Study of Healthcare Innovation, Implementation and Policy, Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. Department of Family, Community and Health Systems, School of Nursing, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Abstract
AIM: To describe the presence and operationalisation of organisational strategies to support implementation of pressure ulcer prevention programmes across acute care hospitals in a large, integrated health-care system. BACKGROUND: Comprehensive pressure ulcer programmes include nursing interventions such as use of a risk assessment tool and organisational strategies such as policies and performance monitoring to embed these interventions into routine care. The current literature provides little detail about strategies used to implement pressure ulcer prevention programmes. METHODS: Data were collected by an e-mail survey to all chief nursing officers in Veterans Health Administration acute care hospitals. Descriptive and bivariate statistics were used to summarise survey responses and evaluate relationships between some variables. RESULTS: Organisational strategies that support implementation of a pressure ulcer prevention programme (policy, committee, staff education, wound care specialists, and use of performance data) were reported at high levels. Considerable variations were noted in how these strategies were operationalised within individual hospitals. CONCLUSION: Organisational strategies to support implementation of pressure ulcer preventive programmes are often not optimally operationalised to achieve consistent, sustainable performance. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: The results of the present study highlight the role and influence of nurse leaders on pressure ulcer prevention program implementation. Published 2016. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.
AIM: To describe the presence and operationalisation of organisational strategies to support implementation of pressure ulcer prevention programmes across acute care hospitals in a large, integrated health-care system. BACKGROUND: Comprehensive pressure ulcer programmes include nursing interventions such as use of a risk assessment tool and organisational strategies such as policies and performance monitoring to embed these interventions into routine care. The current literature provides little detail about strategies used to implement pressure ulcer prevention programmes. METHODS: Data were collected by an e-mail survey to all chief nursing officers in Veterans Health Administration acute care hospitals. Descriptive and bivariate statistics were used to summarise survey responses and evaluate relationships between some variables. RESULTS: Organisational strategies that support implementation of a pressure ulcer prevention programme (policy, committee, staff education, wound care specialists, and use of performance data) were reported at high levels. Considerable variations were noted in how these strategies were operationalised within individual hospitals. CONCLUSION: Organisational strategies to support implementation of pressure ulcer preventive programmes are often not optimally operationalised to achieve consistent, sustainable performance. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: The results of the present study highlight the role and influence of nurse leaders on pressure ulcer prevention program implementation. Published 2016. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.
Authors: Andrea Niederhauser; Carol VanDeusen Lukas; Victoria Parker; Elizabeth A Ayello; Karen Zulkowski; Dan Berlowitz Journal: Adv Skin Wound Care Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 2.347
Authors: Fiona Coyer; Anne Gardner; Anna Doubrovsky; Rae Cole; Frances Mary Ryan; Craig Allen; Greg McNamara Journal: Am J Crit Care Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 2.228
Authors: Paul G Shekelle; Peter J Pronovost; Robert M Wachter; Stephanie L Taylor; Sydney M Dy; Robbie Foy; Susanne Hempel; Kathryn M McDonald; John Ovretveit; Lisa V Rubenstein; Alyce S Adams; Peter B Angood; David W Bates; Leonard Bickman; Pascale Carayon; Liam Donaldson; Naihua Duan; Donna O Farley; Trisha Greenhalgh; John Haughom; Eileen T Lake; Richard Lilford; Kathleen N Lohr; Gregg S Meyer; Marlene R Miller; Duncan V Neuhauser; Gery Ryan; Sanjay Saint; Kaveh G Shojania; Stephen M Shortell; David P Stevens; Kieran Walshe Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2011-05-17 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Carol VanDeusen Lukas; Sally K Holmes; Alan B Cohen; Joseph Restuccia; Irene E Cramer; Michael Shwartz; Martin P Charns Journal: Health Care Manage Rev Date: 2007 Oct-Dec
Authors: Claudia Gorecki; Julia M Brown; E Andrea Nelson; Michelle Briggs; Lisette Schoonhoven; Carol Dealey; Tom Defloor; Jane Nixon Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2009-05-21 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Jan Kottner; Elisabeth Hahnel; Andrea Lichterfeld-Kottner; Ulrike Blume-Peytavi; Andreas Büscher Journal: Int Wound J Date: 2017-11-27 Impact factor: 3.315
Authors: Ryann L Engle; David C Mohr; Sally K Holmes; Marjorie Nealon Seibert; Melissa Afable; Jenniffer Leyson; Mark Meterko Journal: Health Care Manage Rev Date: 2019-06-20