Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31661591›Full record

SynthesisJournal of clinical nursing2020

Patients' and nurses' experiences of fundamental nursing care: A systematic review and qualitative synthesis.

Claire Pentecost, Julia Frost, Holly V R Sugg, Angelique Hilli, Victoria A Goodwin, David A Richards

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of clinical nursing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. A Triptych of Care: An Anthropological Interpretation of Morning Bed-Baths in Greek Intensive Care.Nursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. The development of nursing-sensitive indicators: A critical discussion.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Claire PentecostInstitute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2048-5538
Julia FrostInstitute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3503-5911
Holly V R SuggInstitute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK.
Angelique HilliInstitute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK.
Victoria A GoodwinInstitute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3860-9607
David A RichardsInstitute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8821-5027
University of Exeter · GB

Funding

Department of Health RP-DG-1214-10001NIHR Senior InvestigatorUK National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Programme Development RP-DG-1214-10001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

AIMS AND

objectivesTo systematically identify, appraise and synthesise patients', residents' and nurses' experiences of fundamental nursing care for nutrition, elimination, mobility and hygiene.

backgroundThe evidence base for effective nursing behaviours to assist people with their fundamental care needs is sparse, hampering the development of effective interventions. Synthesising data on patients' and nurses' experiences of fundamentals of nursing care could contribute to the development of such an intervention.

methodsSystematic review and synthesis of qualitative data from qualitative studies on patients' and nurses' experiences of fundamental nursing care behaviours addressing peoples' nutrition, elimination, mobility and hygiene needs. We appraised study quality and relevance and used a narrative approach to data synthesis, fulfilling PRISMA criteria (Appendix S2).

resultsWe identified 22,374 papers, and 47 met our inclusion criteria. Most papers were of low quality. Sixteen papers met our quality and relevance criteria and were included for synthesis. Papers were about nutrition (2) elimination (2), mobility (5), hygiene (5) and multiple care areas (2). We found nurses and patients report that fundamental nursing care practices involve strong leadership, collaborative partnerships with patients and cohesive organisational practices aligned to nursing care objectives and actions.

conclusionsTo improve fundamental care and interventions suitable for testing may require attention to leadership, patient-nurse relationships and organisational coherence plus the fundamentals of care nursing interventions themselves. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: More rigorous mixed methods research about fundamental nursing care is needed to inform nursing practice and improve patient's experience. Nursing interventions should include effective nurse leadership and nurse-patient collaboration and a focus on fundamental care by the host organisation.

Indexed as

LeadershipNurse-Patient RelationsFemaleHumansNurse's RoleNursing CareQualitative Researcheliminationexperience of carefundamental care; qualitative synthesishygienemobilitynursesnutritionpatients

Identifiers

PMID31661591
PMCPMC7319357
OpenAlexW2974854616

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.