ArticleCurationis2019
Resilience of auxiliary nurses providing nursing care to patients with intellectual disabilities at a public mental healthcare institution.
Article in Curationis, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethical dimensions in nursing care for individuals with intellectual disabilities.Nursing ethics · 2026Review
- Use of Standardized and Non-Standardized Tools for Measuring the Risk of Falls and Independence in Clinical Practice.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough mental health is regarded by the International Council of Nurses as a very important element of wellness, healthcare to patients with intellectual disabilities still remains neglected and under-resourced in most societies. Auxiliary nurses are crucial in providing nursing care to patients with intellectual disabilities. These nurses may not be prepared to handle challenges in providing nursing care to these patients, but their resilience can help them to manage these challenges. Limited research is available with regard to the resilience of auxiliary nurses providing nursing care to patients with intellectual disabilities.
objectivesTo explore and describe the perceptions of auxiliary nurses providing nursing care to patients with intellectual disabilities on their resilience and protective mechanisms and vulnerability factors that influence their resilience when providing nursing care to these patients.
methodA qualitative, descriptive inquiry approach was used. The population comprised approximately 220 auxiliary nurses providing nursing care to patients with intellectual disabilities at a mental healthcare institution. Auxiliary nurses were selected through purposive sampling with the assistance of a mediator. The sample size was determined by data saturation. The data were collected through four focus group interviews with altogether 32 participants.
resultsFive main themes emerged from the data. Practical wisdom was applied by the participants. They also made use of different forms of interactions, including the application of strategies such as utilising induction programmes and being willing to learn, in order to remain resilient. Protective mechanisms and vulnerability factors influence their resilience.
conclusionsRecommendations to strengthen the resilience of auxiliary nurses caring for patients with intellectual disabilities were formulated from the research findings, including recommendations for nursing practice, education and nursing research. Informal peer support, as well as addressing ethical issues, improving nurse-patient communication, training to handle adverse working conditions, and continuing education and further research on the practical wisdom of auxiliary nurses, is recommended.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.