Cynthia Thornton Bacon1. 1. Assistant Professor, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, School of Nursing, Greensboro, North Carolina.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe the lived experiences of hospital nurses caring for surgical patients who died from failure to rescue (FTR). DESIGN: A qualitative phenomenologic approach was used. Methods to ensure rigor and trustworthiness were incorporated into the design. METHODS: The investigator conducted one-on-one semistructured interviews with 14 nurses, and data were analyzed using Colaizzi's methods. FINDINGS: Six themes were identified: (a) the environment surrounding the FTR was unexpected; (b) FTR was unexpected but not preventable; (c) nurses were emotionally ill-prepared for the FTR; (d) nurse outcomes are different in unexpected versus expected death; (e) nurses' roles as protectors are important; and (f) FTR effects future nursing practice. CONCLUSIONS: Nurses' reactions after an FTR surgical death may be different when there is no identified nursing error contributing to the event. There may be key differences between deaths that are simply unexpected and those that involve FTR. The importance of mentoring junior nurses in protective surveillance skills is vital. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Developing an understanding of nurses' experiences with FTR can assist nurse leaders to better support nurses who experience FTR deaths. Insight into the environment surrounding FTR deaths provides a foundation for future research aimed at improving patient safety and quality through an improved working environment for nurses.
PURPOSE: To describe the lived experiences of hospital nurses caring for surgical patients who died from failure to rescue (FTR). DESIGN: A qualitative phenomenologic approach was used. Methods to ensure rigor and trustworthiness were incorporated into the design. METHODS: The investigator conducted one-on-one semistructured interviews with 14 nurses, and data were analyzed using Colaizzi's methods. FINDINGS: Six themes were identified: (a) the environment surrounding the FTR was unexpected; (b) FTR was unexpected but not preventable; (c) nurses were emotionally ill-prepared for the FTR; (d) nurse outcomes are different in unexpected versus expected death; (e) nurses' roles as protectors are important; and (f) FTR effects future nursing practice. CONCLUSIONS: Nurses' reactions after an FTR surgical death may be different when there is no identified nursing error contributing to the event. There may be key differences between deaths that are simply unexpected and those that involve FTR. The importance of mentoring junior nurses in protective surveillance skills is vital. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Developing an understanding of nurses' experiences with FTR can assist nurse leaders to better support nurses who experience FTR deaths. Insight into the environment surrounding FTR deaths provides a foundation for future research aimed at improving patient safety and quality through an improved working environment for nurses.