Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34632061›Full record

ArticleSAGE open nursing

Good in Providing Oral Care, but we Could be Better-Nursing Staff Identification of Improvement Areas in Oral Care.

Maria Andersson, Mona Persenius

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in SAGE open nursing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

2 authors.

Maria AnderssonDepartment of Health Science, Faculty of Health, Science and Technology, Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4381-4288
Mona PerseniusDepartment of Health Science, Faculty of Health, Science and Technology, Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOral care to older people in short-term care units is a complex and challenging everyday practice for nursing staff. Oral care research and knowledge about prerequisites and obstacles is extensive. However, there is a lack of knowledge about how nursing staff in short-term care units describe their satisfaction about provided oral care in order to maintain older people's oral health.

objectiveThe purpose of this study was to describe how nursing staff perceive their satisfaction of oral care provided for older people in short-term care units and to identify oral care improvements.

methodsThis study reports on the results of two open-ended questions that were part of a larger study. Informants (

resultsThe analysis yielded one main category; "

conclusionIdentification of older people's oral health problems together with adequate nursing intervention will increase older people's health outcomes and quality of life. However, regardless of work role, the nursing staff might have difficulty changing their behavior or transforming intentions into actions. Oral care is a complicated and proactive practice that requires nursing staff's attention as well as both educational and organizational initiatives. Working in a supportive and collaborative relationship provides prerequisites for optimal oral care in short-term care units.

Indexed as

nursing staffolder peopleoral careoral healthresidential caresatisfaction

Identifiers

PMID34632061
PMCPMC8495511

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.