ArticleNursing open2024
Nurses' perceptions of medical service robots in negative-pressure isolated wards and in general wards: A cross-sectional survey.
Article in Nursing open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo evaluate nurses' workload during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to identify their perception of medical serviced robots (MSRs) that may help with or replace the tasks of nurses in negative-pressure isolated wards and general wards.
designCross-sectional survey.
methodsA researcher-made questionnaire was applied that assessed nurses' current workload and their attitudes towards and perceptions of MSRs. A visual analogue scale (VAS) from 1 to 10 was used to assess workload. Perceptions evaluated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from one point for 'strongly disagree' to five points for 'strongly agree'. A higher VAS score indicated a higher workload. On the other hands, a higher Likert score indicated a more positive perception and three points was neutral. The questionnaire was conducted on 150 nurses in negative-pressure isolated wards for the management of COVID-19 and 150 nurses in general wards. Quota sampling technique was used as sampling technique. Data analysis was performed through independent t-tests, chi-square tests and two-tailed tests. The p-value <0.05 was interpreted to statistically significant.
resultsTwo hundred eighty-two participants responded and 142 belonged to the negative-pressure isolated ward. The overall response rate was 94%, and 94.7% in the negative isolated ward. The mean score ± standard deviation for nursing-related psychological stress at the current work site was 7.18 ± 1.58 points, and the mean score for physical workload was 7.65 ± 1.48. The need for MSRs was rated as 3.66 ± 0.86 out of 5. Overall, a positive attitude towards MSRs was confirmed, with no difference between ward groups. The overall ratings were 3.14 ± 1.15 for perceived availability and 3.26 ± 1.13 for perceived efficiency. Both nurse groups perceived that MSRs were most available and efficient for monitoring and measurements. Nurses in negative-pressure isolated wards perceived MSRs more positively than did nurses in general wards regarding setting of alarms (p = 0.003) and delivery of medical devices/materials (p = 0.013). Based on these results, functional development of MSRs associated with monitoring, measurements, setting of alarms and delivery should be prioritized. No patient or public contribution.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.