Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32131815›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2020

Nursing staff's evaluation of facilitators and barriers during implementation of wireless nurse call systems in residential care facilities. A cross-sectional study.

Janne Dugstad, Vibeke Sundling, Etty R Nilsen, Hilde Eide

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Janne DugstadThe Science Centre Health and Technology, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, University of South-Eastern Norway, Drammen, Norway. janne.dugstad@usn.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4731-8684
Vibeke SundlingNational Centre for Optics, Vision and Eye Care, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, University of South-Eastern Norway, Kongsberg, Norway.
Etty R NilsenThe Science Centre Health and Technology, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, University of South-Eastern Norway, Drammen, Norway.
Hilde EideThe Science Centre Health and Technology, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, University of South-Eastern Norway, Drammen, Norway.
University of South-Eastern Norway · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTraditional nurse call systems used in residential care facilities rely on patients to summon assistance for routine or emergency needs. Wireless nurse call systems (WNCS) offer new affordances for persons unable to actively or consciously engage with the system, allowing detection of hazardous situations, prevention and timely treatment, as well as enhanced nurse workflows. This study aimed to explore facilitators and barriers of implementation of WNCSs in residential care facilities.

methodsThe study had a cross-sectional descriptive design. We collected data from care providers (n = 98) based on the Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovation (MIDI) framework in five Norwegian residential care facilities during the first year of WNCS implementation. The self-reporting MIDI questionnaire was adapted to the contexts. Descriptive statistics were used to explore participant characteristics and MIDI item and determinant scores. MIDI items to which ≥20% of participants disagreed/totally disagreed were regarded as barriers and items to which ≥80% of participants agreed/totally agreed were regarded as facilitators for implementation.

resultsMore facilitators (n = 22) than barriers (n = 6) were identified. The greatest facilitators, reported by 98% of the care providers, were the expected outcomes: the importance and probability of achieving prompt call responses and increased safety, and the normative belief of unit managers. During the implementation process, 87% became familiar with the systems, and 86 and 90%, respectively regarded themselves and their colleagues as competent users of the WNCS. The most salient barriers, reported by 37%, were their lack of prior knowledge and that they found the WNCS difficult to learn. No features of the technology were identified as barriers.

conclusionsOverall, the care providers gave a positive evaluation of the WNCS implementation. The barriers to implementation were addressed by training and practicing technological skills, facilitated by the influence and support by the manager and the colleagues within the residential care unit. WNCSs offer a range of advanced applications and services, and further research is needed as more WNCS functionalities are implemented into residential care services.

Indexed as

Assisted Living FacilitiesAttitude of Health PersonnelAdultAgedComputer Communication NetworksCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNorwayNursing StaffSurveys and QuestionnairesWireless TechnologyYoung AdultCare providersDeterminant frameworkHealth care technologyImplementationLearningNurse call systemNursing homePatient safetyWorkflow

Identifiers

PMID32131815
PMCPMC7057572
OpenAlexW3010191732

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.