Assessing RN-to-RN peer review on clinical units

被引:14
作者
Pfeiffer, Judith A. [1 ]
Wickline, Mary A. [2 ]
Deetz, Jill
Berry, Elise S.
机构
[1] UC San Diego Hlth Syst, Nursing Educ Dev & Res & Psychiat Serv, San Diego, CA 92103 USA
[2] UC San Diego Biomed Lib, San Diego, CA USA
关键词
health care; interprofessional relations; intraprofessional relations; nursing staff; peer review; quality of nursing care; HEALTHY WORK ENVIRONMENTS; QUALITY NURSING-CARE; NURSES; COMMUNICATION; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.1111/j.1365-2834.2011.01321.x
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
pfeiffer j.a., wickline m.a., deetz j. & berry e.s. (2012) Journal of Nursing Management 20, 390400 ?Assessing RN-to-RN peer review on clinical units Aim The primary purpose of this study was to measure informal registered nurse (RN)-to-RN peer review (defined as collegial communication about the quality of nursing care) at the work-unit level. Methods Survey design with cluster sampling of 28 hospital or ambulatory care units (n = 541 respondents). Results were compared with existing patient safety and satisfaction data. A chi-squared test was used to compare responses against nurse characteristics. Results Nurses agreed that RN-to-RN peer review takes place on their units, but no correlation with patient safety and satisfaction data was found. Misunderstandings about the meaning of peer review were evident. Open-ended comments revealed barriers to peer review: fear of retribution, language barriers and lack of professionalism. Conclusions Nurses need clarification of peer review. Issues with common language in a professional environment need to be addressed and nurses can learn collaboration from each others cultures. Implications for nursing management Managers should support RN-to-RN peer review on clinical units. Methods used here may be useful to assess current departmental nurse peer review.
引用
收藏
页码:390 / 400
页数:11
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1990, Basics of Qualitative Research
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2005, AACN STAND EST SUST
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2005, Code of ethics for nurses
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2006, POLICY POLIT NURS PR
[5]  
Boggs K.U., 2007, INTERPERSONAL RELATI, P479
[6]   Quality nursing care in the words of nurses [J].
Burhans, Linda Maas ;
Alligood, Martha Raile .
JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, 2010, 66 (08) :1689-1697
[7]   Nurse practitioners' communication styles and their impact on patient outcomes: An integrated literature review [J].
Charlton, Cody R. ;
Dearing, Karen S. ;
Berry, Judith A. ;
Johnson, Mary Jayne .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF NURSE PRACTITIONERS, 2008, 20 (07) :382-388
[8]   The effect of small peer group continuous quality improvement on the clinical practice of midwives in The Netherlands [J].
Engels, Y ;
Verheijen, N ;
Fleuren, M ;
Mokkink, H ;
Grol, R .
MIDWIFERY, 2003, 19 (04) :250-258
[9]   A systematic review of the effectiveness of nurse communication with patients with complex communication needs with a focus on the use of augmentative and alternative communication [J].
Finke, Erinn H. ;
Light, Janice ;
Kitko, Lisa .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2008, 17 (16) :2102-2115
[10]   Nurse-patient interaction and communication: A systematic literature review [J].
Fleischer S. ;
Berg A. ;
Zimmermann M. ;
Wüste K. ;
Behrens J. .
Journal of Public Health, 2009, 17 (5) :339-353