OBJECTIVES: Fall TIPS (Tailoring Interventions for Patient Safety) is an evidence-based fall prevention program that led to a 25% reduction in falls in hospitalized adults. Because it would be helpful to assess nurses' perceptions of burdens imposed on them by using Fall TIPS or other fall prevention program, we conducted a study to learn benefits and burdens. METHODS: A 3-phase mixed-method study was conducted at 3 hospitals in Massachusetts and 3 in New York: (1) initial qualitative, elicited and categorized nurses' views of time spent implementing Fall TIPS; (2) second qualitative, used nurses' quotes to develop items, research team inputs for refinement and organization, and clinical nurses' evaluation and suggestions to develop the prototype scale; and (3) quantitative, evaluated psychometric properties. RESULTS: Four "time" themes emerged: (1) efficiency, (2) inefficiency, (3) balances out, and (4) valued. A 20-item prototype Fall Prevention Efficiency Scale was developed, administered to 383 clinical nurses, and reduced to 13 items. Individual items demonstrated robust stability with Pearson correlations of 0.349 to 0.550 and paired t tests of 0.155 to 1.636. Four factors explained 74.3% variance and provided empirical support for the scale's conceptual basis. The scale achieved excellent internal consistency values (0.82-0.92) when examined with the test, validation, and paired (both test and retest) samples. CONCLUSIONS: This new scale assess nurses' perceptions of how a fall prevention program affects their efficiency, which impacts the likelihood of use. Learning nurses' beliefs about time wasted when implementing new programs allows hospitals to correct problems that squander time.
OBJECTIVES: Fall TIPS (Tailoring Interventions for Patient Safety) is an evidence-based fall prevention program that led to a 25% reduction in falls in hospitalized adults. Because it would be helpful to assess nurses' perceptions of burdens imposed on them by using Fall TIPS or other fall prevention program, we conducted a study to learn benefits and burdens. METHODS: A 3-phase mixed-method study was conducted at 3 hospitals in Massachusetts and 3 in New York: (1) initial qualitative, elicited and categorized nurses' views of time spent implementing Fall TIPS; (2) second qualitative, used nurses' quotes to develop items, research team inputs for refinement and organization, and clinical nurses' evaluation and suggestions to develop the prototype scale; and (3) quantitative, evaluated psychometric properties. RESULTS: Four "time" themes emerged: (1) efficiency, (2) inefficiency, (3) balances out, and (4) valued. A 20-item prototype Fall Prevention Efficiency Scale was developed, administered to 383 clinical nurses, and reduced to 13 items. Individual items demonstrated robust stability with Pearson correlations of 0.349 to 0.550 and paired t tests of 0.155 to 1.636. Four factors explained 74.3% variance and provided empirical support for the scale's conceptual basis. The scale achieved excellent internal consistency values (0.82-0.92) when examined with the test, validation, and paired (both test and retest) samples. CONCLUSIONS: This new scale assess nurses' perceptions of how a fall prevention program affects their efficiency, which impacts the likelihood of use. Learning nurses' beliefs about time wasted when implementing new programs allows hospitals to correct problems that squander time.
Authors: Linda W Higgins; Judith A Shovel; Andrew L Bilderback; Holly L Lorenz; Susan C Martin; Debra J Rogers; Tamra E Minnier Journal: J Nurs Care Qual Date: 2017 Jul/Sep Impact factor: 1.597
Authors: Patricia C Dykes; Michael Bogaisky; Eileen J Carter; Megan Duckworth; Ann C Hurley; Emily M Jackson; Srijesa Khasnabish; Mary Ellen Lindros; Stuart R Lipsitz; Maureen Scanlan; Shao P Yu; David W Bates; Jason S Adelman Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2018-10-09 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Wai Yin Leung; Jason Adelman; David W Bates; Alexandra Businger; John S Dykes; Awatef Ergai; Ann Hurley; Zachary Katsulis; Sarah Khorasani; Maureen Scanlan; Laura Schenkel; Amisha Rai; Patricia C Dykes Journal: J Patient Saf Date: 2021-08-01 Impact factor: 2.844
Authors: E K Mahoney; A C Hurley; L Volicer; M Bell; P Gianotis; M Hartshorn; P Lane; R Lesperance; S MacDonald; L Novakoff; Y Rheaume; R Timms; V Warden Journal: Res Nurs Health Date: 1999-02 Impact factor: 2.228
Authors: Megan Duckworth; Emily Leung; Theresa Fuller; Jenzel Espares; Brittany Couture; Frank Chang; Alexandra C Businger; Sarah Collins; Anuj Dalal; Anne Fladger; Jeffrey L Schnipper; Kumiko O Schnock; David W Bates; Patricia C Dykes Journal: J Gerontol Nurs Date: 2017-04-01 Impact factor: 1.436
Authors: Megan Duckworth; Jason Adelman; Katherine Belategui; Zinnia Feliciano; Emily Jackson; Srijesa Khasnabish; I-Fong Sun Lehman; Mary Ellen Lindros; Heather Mortimer; Kasey Ryan; Maureen Scanlan; Linda Berger Spivack; Shao Ping Yu; David Westfall Bates; Patricia C Dykes Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2019-01-21 Impact factor: 5.428