Hourly Rounding Implementation

Rondinelli, June; Ecker, Margaret; Crawford, Cecelia L.; Seelinger, Connie; Omery, Anna

doi:10.1097/nna.0b013e31824ccd43

Cited by 27 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Reports from the current study's participants showed that rounding provides the nurses with "peace of mind" and a feeling that they have given the patients good, professional, qualitative, and timely service. These findings correlate previous studies that described rounding benefits as decreasing pressure on nurses and enabling them quiet breaks with no bells and patient calls (Olrich, Kalman & Nigolian, 2012;Duffin, 2010;Halm, 2009;Neville, Lake, LeMunyon, Paul & Whitmore, 2012;Rondinelli, Ecker, Crawford, Seelinger & Omery, 2012;Wright & McSherry,2013).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Nurses' Perception of Patient Rounds – between the Real and the Ideal

Rassin¹,

Kanety²

2017

IJSN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Although patient rounds became part of the wards' routine for many years, there are still gaps regarding its tasks, cyclicality and participants and also the round was not backed by clear goals or instructions.Aim: to examine how nurses perceive rounding in terms of its cyclicality, tasks and participants.Method: research participants were 181 nurses of the internal, surgery-orthopedic, and maternity wards. They fill a questionnaire containing 41 items, specifically designed for this research. Data was analyzed using descriptive and comparative statistics.Results: significant differences between nurses from the various wings (p=0.000) were found in the performance of actual rounding during all shifts. Rounding was performed in the internal wards every two hours and 48 minutes in average, compared with every two hours and 12 minutes in the surgery wards and every hour and 54 minutes in the maternity wards. A gaps were found between real and ideal (p=0.000), show the ideal timeframe between the rounds were shortened by 10-30 minutes in each shift. The tasks rated as most important in all shifts were: early identification of medical distress situations (respiratory, bleeding, changes in conciseness etc.), taking actions to avoid complications including identifying a malfunctioning transfusion, position changes, answering patient questions, pain assessment and treatment, and answering basic needs.Conclusions: A policy for the performance of rounding, may bridge the gap between real and ideal and promote the quality of nursing care will provide clear guidance as to its tasks, cyclicality and participants.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Nurses' Perception of Patient Rounds – between the Real and the Ideal

Rassin¹,

Kanety²

2017

IJSN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Tucker et al's (2012) qualitative focus groups with nurses reported they found documentation burdensome. Two studies discussed the use of individualized rounding, acronyms and visual cues as beneficial in the implementation (Flowers et al, 2016;Rondinelli et al, 2012). IR was described positively as an outcome for staff in all studies, such as increased staff satisfaction and efficiency.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsqualitative Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A lack of communication and understanding had a negative impact on the implementation of IR (Deitrick, Baker, Paxton, Flores, & Swavely, 2012) and active role modelling, adequate education and staff involvement and ownership had a positive impact on IR (Rondinelli, Ecker, Crawford, Seelinger, & Omery, 2012;Willis et al, 2016). Delegation practices and accountability confusion were mentioned in three studies (Deitrick et al, 2012;Flowers et al, 2016;Rondinelli et al, 2012), as well as documentation and how this occurs (Deitrick et al, 2012;Flowers et al, 2016). Tucker et al's (2012) qualitative focus groups with nurses reported they found documentation burdensome.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsqualitative Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…IR was described positively as an outcome for staff in all studies, such as increased staff satisfaction and efficiency. Many negative attitudes, opinions or influencing factors were also discussed; however, for example frustration and confusion, (Deitrick et al, 2012;Willis et al, 2016) workflow and understanding (Deitrick et al, 2012), context, environment and staffing levels (Flowers et al, 2016), thus having an impact on the success or failure of the intervention, creating questions around sustainability of the practice (Rondinelli et al, 2012).…”

Section: Study Characteristicsqualitative Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Intentional rounding was seen as advantageous for patient and staff satisfaction (Flowers et al, 2016;Rondinelli et al, 2012) and…”

Section: Study Characteristicsqualitative Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Intentional rounding – An integrative literature review

Ryan

Jackson

Woods

et al. 2018

Journal of Advanced Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims To establish current knowledge about the efficacy and acceptance of intentional rounding in current practice, from the perspective of nurses, patients, patient satisfaction and safety indicators. Background Intentional rounding is a formal means of nursing staff checking care needs of patients in hospital settings on a regular basis. Design An integrative literature review conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute manual. Data sources A literature search from 2000 – 2017 was conducted using the following electronic databases: The Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ProQuest, PubMed, Informit, Sage and Scopus. Review methods Articles were assessed for quality and rigor using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool and the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment tool for Quantitative Studies. A sequential explanatory mixed studies approach was used to combine qualitative and quantitative evidence in a single review. In‐depth parallel reviews of the quantitative and qualitative evidence were undertaken, and then a synthesis of the combined qualitative and quantitative evidence conducted. Results Intentional rounding has positive outcomes on patient satisfaction and safety. Nurses perceive benefits related to intentional rounding; however, some nurses perceive it as an additional, unnecessary task. The effectiveness of intentional rounding is influenced by external factors including leadership and formal rounding education, workload, ward layout, staffing and experience level. Conclusion Intentional rounding is a positive intervention in patient safety and satisfaction generally, but needs further research and consideration about actual impact, staff delegation, education and engagement, student nurse involvement, documentation and specializing the structure of intentional rounding.

show abstract