The article explores how parents are included and excluded in the care of hospitalized children and examines the inclusion/exclusion practices by the ideology of human needs.
Method: Interviews with parents/nurses, observations of parents/nurses/children in a Norwegian children’s ward; the material is analyzed in the extension of Henderson’s and Orem’s ideas on human needs.
Result: Parents performed a major part of the work to take care of basic nursing and care tasks. They had also a central role in the performing of a variety of medical procedures, although the nurse was primarily responsible. Parents were only relieved when the nurse had time.
Conclusion: Parents performed most of the care and contributed to medical treatment. These practices were usually in harmony with the parents’ need to be with their children.
Background: Older patients admitted to hospital for surgery are transferred quickly between different levels of health care. There is a risk for adverse events that may lead to unnecessary suffering for the patient.
Aim: To explore and describe risk for adverse events in the perioperative nursing care process for older patients.
Method: Qualitative latent content analysis was chosen using focus group, dyadic and individual semi-structured interviews with altogether 15 nurses from different contexts in the perioperative nursing care process.
Results: The participating nurses recognized transfer-, documentation- and information system deficits in the coordination of perioperative care that may cause risk for adverse events. However, they do not take enough own responsibility for reporting and changing practice on a system level.
Conclusion: The findings create the basis for changes towards person-centered perioperative nursing, interprofessional and organizational cooperation in the transfer and reporting to improve patient safety.
Inequality in health is a growing problem internationally as well as in Denmark. Research has so far primarily focused on analyzing the social determinants causing the problem and suggesting structural health political solutions to it. Less work has been done on examining nurses’ and other health professionals’ potential for reducing this inequality and the ethical dilemmas they face when doing so. The purpose of this paper is to analyze and discuss two central ethical dilemmas about paternalism and priority-setting, nurses – and other health professionals – face when working on reducing inequality in health in a municipal context. The paper makes use methodologically of theories of paternalism, political liberalism and communitarianism. We conclude the paper by arguing that nurses are permitted to adopt weak paternalism to reduce inequality in health and that individual socially deprived citizens should not be given more priority than non-deprived citizens in municipal healthcare.
In intervention studies, researchers often make a distinction between explanatory designs and pragmatic designs. Pragmatic designs have often decreased internal validity, but offer increased possibilities of implementation into clinical practice. Most nursing studies are pragmatic, and by analysing a study in which the purpose was to evaluate the effect of a nursing intervention, the different pragmatic and explanatory elements are discussed. It is concluded that the pragmatic elements need careful attention to enhance transferability.
Background: The aim of this study was to develop an instrument to identify rehabilitation needs and distress in everyday life in patients with ischemic heart disease. Studies show that the challenges and needs of cardiac patients are not identified systematically in the hospital-based rehabilitation practice. This indicates the lack of a specific instrument based on patients’ needs and experiences.
Method: Items in the instrument were generated in several stages driven by methodologic literature. Inspired by existing instruments, a literature study was conducted, and health care professionals and patients made the content validation through two focus group interviews. Afterwards, the instrument was designed and face validated through cognitive interviewing and a survey.
Result: The result was a 54-item instrument, based on patient’s terminology. Physical and psychological factors and areas related to everyday life were included. Conclusion: This study shows the importance of involving patients in developing an instrument based on self-report.
This is an abbreviated version of professor Niels Buus’ inaugural lecture at the Faculty of Health, University of Southern Denmark, in Slagelse on 7 September 2017. The lecture is organised round a heuristic model of user involvement in clinical health care and in health care research. Parts of Buus’ previous and on-going research in Denmark and Australia are introduced and mapped onto the model as a way of comparing approaches and their inherent levels of user involvement. Buus emphasises research on the collaborative and resource-oriented Open Dialogue approach to holistic health care service delivery, the MyPlan crisis management app for suicide prevention, and psychosocial rehabilitation of elderly people bereaved by suicide. Some caveats and possibilities of user involvement are discussed.
In the Ph.D. study, Hospital Meals: An Asylum for People in a Vulnerable Situation. A phenomenological-hermeneutic study about patients' experience of meals during hospitalization with a neurological disease, Malene Beck explores the meaning of mealtimes during hospitalization. The PhD showed how patients were longing for homeliness and that aesthetic elements associated with the meal had the potential to make the patients feel at home and safe. Furthermore, during an intervention called ‘Quiet Please’ it was illustrated that the patients experienced mealtimes as a significant and important part of their care and treatment, which meant they were allowed to take a mental break from the fast life of the hospital. The health professionals also saw the intervention as a positive feature.
2/2018 Årgang 32
Aarhus Universitet v/ Bente Martinsen Woythal
Institut for Folkesundhed, Sektion for Sygepleje, Campus Emdrup
Tuborgvej 164, bygning B
2400 København NV