| Literature DB >> 35039036 |
Yi-Tsao Chen1,2, Yi-Cheng Chiu2, Meng-Lan Teng2, Pei-Hung Liao3.
Abstract
AIMS: To develop a clinical medical material management App for nurses, in order to reduce their workload and improve the efficacy of medical material management.Entities:
Keywords: Medical material management; Nursing shift; Nursing workload; Work stress
Year: 2022 PMID: 35039036 PMCID: PMC8761961 DOI: 10.1186/s12912-022-00806-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Nurs ISSN: 1472-6955
Fig. 1Information system acceptance mode
Fig. 2Shift APP function diagram
Descriptive statistical analysis of demographic data of the participants (N = 57)
| Category change ( | Mean ± SD | Number of people (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 29.75 ± 6.99 | ||
| 94.39 ± 80.67 | ||
| ≦24 | 10 (17.5%) | |
| 25 ~ 48 | 11 (19.3%) | |
| 49 ~ 72 | 7 (12.3%) | |
| 73 ~ 96 | 12 (21.1%) | |
| > 96 | 17 (29.8%) | |
| Female | 52 (91.2%) | |
| Male | 5 (8.8%) | |
| Junior college | 14 (24.6%) | |
| Bachelor | 43 (75.4%) | |
| Master or above | 0 (0%) | |
| Internal Medicine Department | 21 (36.8%) | |
| Surgery Department | 36 (63.2%) | |
| RCC | 10 (17.5%) | |
| MICU | 11 (19.3%) | |
| CCU | 25 (43.9%) | |
| SICU | 11 (19.3%) | |
| N | 13 (22.8%) | |
| N1 | 8 (14.0%) | |
| N2 | 29 (50.9%) | |
| N3 | 6 (10.5%) | |
| N4 | 1 (1.8%) | |
| 3.39 ± 0.73 | ||
| Very bad (1 point) | 2 (3.5%) | |
| Poor (2 points) | 1 (1.8%) | |
| Normal (3 points) | 28 (49.1%) | |
| Good (4 points) | 25 (43.9%) | |
| Very good (5 points) | 1 (1.8%) | |
Workload analysis results before and after the Shift Check App intervention (N = 57)
| Effectiveness Indicator | Before Intervention ( | After Intervention ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD | Number (%) | Mean ± SD | Number (%) | |||
| Workload | 4.49 ± 2.05 | 3.82 ± 1.68 | 2.21 | .031* | ||
| No | 3 (5.3%) | 2 (3.5%) | ||||
| Mild | 14 (24.6%) | 19 (33.3%) | ||||
| Moderate | 32 (56.1%) | 34 (59.6%) | ||||
| heavy | 8 (14.0%) | 2 (3.5%) | ||||
*. P < .05
Paired t test
Fig. 3Post-test and Pre test workload different Boxplot
Analysis results of stress scale before and after the intervention of the Shift Check App (N = 57)
| Effect indicator | Pre-test ( | Post-test ( | T | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | |||
| Personal response | −0.184 | .855 | ||
| Total score | 45.37 ± 25.58 | 46.18 ± 25.16 | ||
| Grand average | 2.6˙ ± 1.50 | 2.72 ± 1.48 | ||
| Work concern | −0.147 | .884 | ||
| Total score | 32.85 ± 17.71 | 33.28 ± 15.35 | ||
| Grand average | 2.53 ± 1.36 | 2.56 ± 1.18 | ||
| Work competence | 0.334 | .740 | ||
| Total score | 40.95 ± 15.27 | 40.12 ± 15.22 | ||
| Grand average | 3.72 ± 1.39 | 3.65 ± 1.38 | ||
| Inability to complete personal work | 0.899 | .372 | ||
| Total score | 20.79 ± 8.84 | 19.51 ± 8.58 | ||
| Grand average | 3.46 ± 1.48 | 3.25 ± 1.43 | ||
*. P < .05
Paired t test
Analysis results of information acceptance intention before and after the Shift Check App intervention (N = 57)
| Effectiveness Indicator | Before Intervention ( | After Intervention ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | |||
| Behavioral intention | −2.05 | .045* | ||
| Total average | 3.19 ± 0.77 | 3.46 ± 0.78 | ||
| Technology use intention | −3.32 | .002* | ||
| Total average | 3.10 ± 0.63 | 3.43 ± 0.65 | ||
| Contributing factors | −3.67 | .001* | ||
| Total average | 3.20 ± 0.44 | 3.64 ± 0.92 | ||
| Job satisfaction | −0.73 | .468 | ||
| Total average | 3.37 ± 0.50 | 3.43 ± 0.46 |
*. P < .05
Paired t test