Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38347548›Full record

ArticleBMC nursing2024

A grounded theory of the implementation of medical orders by clinical nurses.

Monireh Asadi, Fazlollah Ahmadi, Easa Mohammadi, Mojtaba Vaismoradi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nursing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Monireh AsadiNursing Department, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, P.O. Box. 14155-4838, Tehran, Iran.
Fazlollah AhmadiNursing Department, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, P.O. Box. 14155-4838, Tehran, Iran. ahmadif@modares.ac.ir.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1961-7735
Easa MohammadiNursing Department, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, P.O. Box. 14155-4838, Tehran, Iran.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6169-9829
Mojtaba VaismoradiFaculty of Nursing and Health Sciences, Nord University, Bodø, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5157-4886

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo explore the process of implementing medical orders by clinical nurses, and identify specific areas of concern in the implementation process, and uncover strategies to address these concerns.

backgroundThe implementation of medical orders is a crucial responsibility for clinical nurses, as they bear legal accountability for the precise implementation of directives issued by medical practitioners. The accurate implementation of these orders not only shapes the quality and safety of healthcare services but also presents numerous challenges that demand careful consideration.

methodThis study employed a qualitative design using a grounded theory approach to construct a comprehensive theoretical framework grounded in the insights and experiences of nurses operating within the hospital settings of Iran. The study encompassed 20 participants, comprising 16 clinical nurses, two nurse managers, and two specialist doctors working in hospital settings. The selection process involved purposeful and theoretical sampling methods to ensure diverse perspectives. Data collection unfolded through in-depth, individual, semi-structured interviews, persisting until data saturation was achieved. The analytical framework proposed by Corbin and Strauss (2015) guided the process, leading to the development of a coherent theory encapsulating the essence of the study phenomenon.

findingsThe primary finding of the study underscores the significance of 'legal threat and job prestige' highlighting diverse repercussions in case of errors in the implementation of medical orders. At the core of the investigation, the central variable and the theory of the study was the 'selective and tasteful implementation of orders to avoid legal and organizational accountability.' This indicated a set of strategies employed by the nurses in the implementation of medical orders, encapsulated through three fundamental concepts: 'accuracy in controlling medical orders,' 'untruth documentation,' and 'concealment of events. The formidable influence of legal threats and job prestige was further compounded by factors such as heavy workloads, the doctor's non-compliance with legal instructions for giving verbal orders, the addition of orders by the doctor without informing nurses, and pressure by nursing managers to complete documentation. The resultant psychological distress experienced by nurses not only jeopardized patient safety but also underscored the intricate interplay between legal implications and professional standing within the healthcare framework.

conclusionAlleviating staff shortages, enhancing the professional rapport between doctors and nurses, offering legal support to nursing staff, implementing measures such as recording departmental phone conversations to deter the non-acceptance of verbal orders, fostering an organizational culture that embraces nurse fallibility and encourages improvement, and upgrading equipment can ameliorate nurses' apprehensions and contribute to the safe implementation of medical orders.

Indexed as

Grounded theoryMedical ordersNursesNursing documentationPatient safety

Identifiers

PMID38347548
PMCPMC10863222

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.