INTRODUCTION: Respiratory rate is the first sign of patient decline. Monitoring and recording respiratory rate are essential nursing competencies. However, health care system emergency nurses' ability to differentiate normal from abnormal respiratory rates was unknown. We conducted a health care improvement project to assess emergency nurses' accuracy in "spot" and "formal" assessments, understand assessment practices, and determine competency and training needs. METHODS: In an anonymous cross-sectional survey, 78 emergency nurses from 1 health care system viewed 3 "spot" and 3 "formal" mock patient videos and answered questions in REDCap (Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN). Accuracy (abnormal/normal), systematic error (bias), and random error (imprecision) were assessed. Descriptive statistics, bivariate analyses, and qualitative content analysis of open-ended questions were reported. RESULTS: Most emergency nurses identified respiration as abnormal in spot and formal assessment videos. Accuracy was lowest for the video displaying 6 breaths per minute. Emergency nurses were more likely to identify abnormal breathing in all formal assessment videos (n = 59, 75.7%) than in all spot assessment videos (n = 41, 52.6%) (McNemar χ2 = 10.32, P = 0.001). Most emergency nurses reported a willingness to use formal assessments and thought that respiratory rate was a good indicator of a patient's condition. The barriers to accurate assessment included time limitations, prior training focusing on assessments lasting less than 30 seconds, and monitor and staff errors. DISCUSSION: Respiratory rate assessment may be best assessed formally, particularly for bradypnea, where formal checks may outperform spot checks. The results present areas for improving respiratory rate assessment training and clinical practice.
INTRODUCTION: Respiratory rate is the first sign of patient decline. Monitoring and recording respiratory rate are essential nursing competencies. However, health care system emergency nurses' ability to differentiate normal from abnormal respiratory rates was unknown. We conducted a health care improvement project to assess emergency nurses' accuracy in "spot" and "formal" assessments, understand assessment practices, and determine competency and training needs. METHODS: In an anonymous cross-sectional survey, 78 emergency nurses from 1 health care system viewed 3 "spot" and 3 "formal" mock patient videos and answered questions in REDCap (Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN). Accuracy (abnormal/normal), systematic error (bias), and random error (imprecision) were assessed. Descriptive statistics, bivariate analyses, and qualitative content analysis of open-ended questions were reported. RESULTS: Most emergency nurses identified respiration as abnormal in spot and formal assessment videos. Accuracy was lowest for the video displaying 6 breaths per minute. Emergency nurses were more likely to identify abnormal breathing in all formal assessment videos (n = 59, 75.7%) than in all spot assessment videos (n = 41, 52.6%) (McNemar χ2 = 10.32, P = 0.001). Most emergency nurses reported a willingness to use formal assessments and thought that respiratory rate was a good indicator of a patient's condition. The barriers to accurate assessment included time limitations, prior training focusing on assessments lasting less than 30 seconds, and monitor and staff errors. DISCUSSION: Respiratory rate assessment may be best assessed formally, particularly for bradypnea, where formal checks may outperform spot checks. The results present areas for improving respiratory rate assessment training and clinical practice.