ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2026
Nurses' Self-Reported Practices and Prescribers' Expectations in Intravenous Fluid Therapy for Hospitalised Patients: A Survey Study and Clinical Documentation Review.
Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo assess self-reported practices and knowledge of nurses and prescribers (i.e., physicians and nurse practitioners) on intravenous fluid therapy, and to evaluate how this is documented through a clinical documentation review.
designMulticentre cross-sectional study, between April 2022 and July 2022, across 13 wards from four Dutch hospitals.
methodsA survey study was conducted to assess self-reported practices related to intravenous fluid therapy. A 12-item questionnaire evaluated knowledge. To gain insights into documentation practices, a retrospective chart review was performed. Data analysis involved descriptive statistics, with group differences analysed using the chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test, as appropriate.
resultsThree hundred and four healthcare professionals completed the questionnaire (92% nurses). The majority of prescribers (n = 20/25; 80%) expected that nurses would start, stop or change intravenous fluid therapy. Overall, the median number of correct answers to knowledge questions was eight (IQR 7-9, range 0-12); four participants (1%) answered all knowledge questions correctly. Knowledge about the composition of sodium chloride 0.9% solution was limited. Analysis of patient charts revealed that 54% (196/362) received intravenous fluids, most commonly 0.9% sodium chloride infusion (168/195; 86%), although the indication was described in 3% (6/196). Thirty-one percent (61/196) of patients received intravenous fluids to keep the vein open (< 30 mL/h).
conclusionThe study identified shared responsibility, a knowledge gap, and limited documentation concerning intravenous fluids. Prescribers expect nurses to adjust intravenous fluids without consulting a prescriber, which aligns with what nurses do, although they are not legally authorised. Given the limited documentation of the indication for intravenous fluids, it is plausible that several patients received intravenous fluids unnecessarily. IMPLICATIONS: The perceived shared responsibility presents an opportunity to develop a protocol engaging both prescribers and nurses, aiming to guide more targeted infusion therapy. IMPACT: Reducing unnecessary infusions to keep-the-vein-open can help eliminate low-value care. REPORTING
methodCROSS guideline. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: 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.