Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37106369›Full record

ArticleBMC nursing2023

Documenting care together with patients: the experiences of nurses and patients.

Helle Schøllhammer, Tina Magaard Jørgensen, Hanne Irene Jensen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nursing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Helle SchøllhammerDay Surgery Unit, Kolding Hospital, Sygehusvej 24, Kolding, DK - 6100, Denmark. Helle.schoellhammer@rsyd.dk.
Tina Magaard JørgensenDay Surgery Unit, Kolding Hospital, Sygehusvej 24, Kolding, DK - 6100, Denmark.
Hanne Irene JensenDay Surgery Unit, Kolding Hospital, Sygehusvej 24, Kolding, DK - 6100, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOne way in which patients can participate in care is by taking part in medical documentation. Producing documentation together with patients has been found to decrease the amount of incorrect information, help patients to be involved, and promote shared decision-making. The aims of this study were to develop and implement a practice of producing documentation together with patients and to examine staff and patient experiences of this practice.

methodsA quality improvement study was conducted from 2019 to 2021 at a Day Surgery Unit in a Danish University Hospital. Before implementing a practice of documenting together with patients, nurses' perceptions of doing documentation together with patients were examined via a questionnaire survey. After an implementation period, a similar follow-up survey with staff was conducted, together with structured patient phone interviews.

resultsA total of 24 nursing staff out of 28 (86%) filled in the questionnaire at baseline and 22 out of 26 (85%) at follow-up. A total of 61 out of 74 invited patients (82%) were interviewed. At baseline, the majority (71-96%) of participants agreed that documentation done together with the patient would contribute to increased patient safety, fewer errors, real-time documentation, patient involvement, visible patient perspective, correction of errors, more accessible information and less duplication of work. At follow-up, significant decreases in the staffs' positive perceptions of the benefits of documenting together with patients were found for all areas except for "real-time documentation" and "less duplication of work". Almost all patients found it okay that the nurses wrote up medical documentation during the interview, and more than 90% of patients found the staff responsive or very responsive and present during the reception interview.

conclusionBefore implementation of a practice of documenting together with patients, the majority of staff assessed such documentation as being beneficial, but a significant decrease in positive assessment was found at follow-up, with challenges such as feeling less connected with the patient and practical, IT-related issues being described. The patients found the staff to be present and responsive and felt that it was important to know what was being written in their medical record.

Indexed as

DocumentationInterventionMedical recordsPatient involvementPatient participation

Identifiers

PMID37106369
PMCPMC10133905

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.