Cargando…

66: EXPLORING THE APPLICATION OF EVIDENCE IN THE IRANIAN NURSES' CLINICAL JUDGMENT AND DECISION MAKING: A HYBRID QUALITATIVE STUDY

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Clinical judgment is based on data collection, information, interpretation, and deduction due to clinical decision making for election of kind/place and time for an intervention or priority. This process needs to apply appropriate evidences; so this study was conducted in order...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Seidi, Jamal, Alhani, Fatemah, Salsali, Mahvash, Kazemnejad, Anoushirvan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5759541/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015415.66
_version_ 1783291223191060480
author Seidi, Jamal
Alhani, Fatemah
Salsali, Mahvash
Kazemnejad, Anoushirvan
author_facet Seidi, Jamal
Alhani, Fatemah
Salsali, Mahvash
Kazemnejad, Anoushirvan
author_sort Seidi, Jamal
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Clinical judgment is based on data collection, information, interpretation, and deduction due to clinical decision making for election of kind/place and time for an intervention or priority. This process needs to apply appropriate evidences; so this study was conducted in order to explain how to use the evidence of Iranian Nurses' Clinical Judgment and Decision Making. METHODS: This Qualitative Study was a hybrid content and concept analysis. This study was a part of a research project approved by the National Institute of Health Research that was conducted at Kurdistan University of medical sciences in 2015. Based on purposive sampling, 26 open and semi structure interviews were conducted with 18 participants. Data collection simultaneously analyzing was continued till saturation and emerging themes. In the concept analyzing, literatures including, 12 articles, 2 books, and 1thesis were selected. Then these literatures were reviewed based on thematic analyzing, RESULTS: Results of content analysis showed two main themes including; integration of the type of evidence based on situational of practice (for example guidelines in emergency ward) and how to access evidence (for example access by internet). Results of content analysis showed two factors determining the level of evidence used, including normal or urgent clinical conditions, having enough time. CONCLUSION: Combined results showed that integrating evidence in clinical judgment and decision making were based on access to evidence; clinical conditions, and time. Guidelines are the best integrated evidence in emergency wards and critical condition. When the guidelines were not available or there was insufficient time, nurses used their own experiences or the expert opinion. Therefore, it is recommended to update the guidelines and localize them for having appropriate integration of evidence.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5759541
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57595412018-02-12 66: EXPLORING THE APPLICATION OF EVIDENCE IN THE IRANIAN NURSES' CLINICAL JUDGMENT AND DECISION MAKING: A HYBRID QUALITATIVE STUDY Seidi, Jamal Alhani, Fatemah Salsali, Mahvash Kazemnejad, Anoushirvan BMJ Open Abstracts from the 5th International Society for Evidence-Based Healthcare Congress, Kish Island, Ira BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Clinical judgment is based on data collection, information, interpretation, and deduction due to clinical decision making for election of kind/place and time for an intervention or priority. This process needs to apply appropriate evidences; so this study was conducted in order to explain how to use the evidence of Iranian Nurses' Clinical Judgment and Decision Making. METHODS: This Qualitative Study was a hybrid content and concept analysis. This study was a part of a research project approved by the National Institute of Health Research that was conducted at Kurdistan University of medical sciences in 2015. Based on purposive sampling, 26 open and semi structure interviews were conducted with 18 participants. Data collection simultaneously analyzing was continued till saturation and emerging themes. In the concept analyzing, literatures including, 12 articles, 2 books, and 1thesis were selected. Then these literatures were reviewed based on thematic analyzing, RESULTS: Results of content analysis showed two main themes including; integration of the type of evidence based on situational of practice (for example guidelines in emergency ward) and how to access evidence (for example access by internet). Results of content analysis showed two factors determining the level of evidence used, including normal or urgent clinical conditions, having enough time. CONCLUSION: Combined results showed that integrating evidence in clinical judgment and decision making were based on access to evidence; clinical conditions, and time. Guidelines are the best integrated evidence in emergency wards and critical condition. When the guidelines were not available or there was insufficient time, nurses used their own experiences or the expert opinion. Therefore, it is recommended to update the guidelines and localize them for having appropriate integration of evidence. BMJ Publishing Group 2017-02-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5759541/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015415.66 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Abstracts from the 5th International Society for Evidence-Based Healthcare Congress, Kish Island, Ira
Seidi, Jamal
Alhani, Fatemah
Salsali, Mahvash
Kazemnejad, Anoushirvan
66: EXPLORING THE APPLICATION OF EVIDENCE IN THE IRANIAN NURSES' CLINICAL JUDGMENT AND DECISION MAKING: A HYBRID QUALITATIVE STUDY
title 66: EXPLORING THE APPLICATION OF EVIDENCE IN THE IRANIAN NURSES' CLINICAL JUDGMENT AND DECISION MAKING: A HYBRID QUALITATIVE STUDY
title_full 66: EXPLORING THE APPLICATION OF EVIDENCE IN THE IRANIAN NURSES' CLINICAL JUDGMENT AND DECISION MAKING: A HYBRID QUALITATIVE STUDY
title_fullStr 66: EXPLORING THE APPLICATION OF EVIDENCE IN THE IRANIAN NURSES' CLINICAL JUDGMENT AND DECISION MAKING: A HYBRID QUALITATIVE STUDY
title_full_unstemmed 66: EXPLORING THE APPLICATION OF EVIDENCE IN THE IRANIAN NURSES' CLINICAL JUDGMENT AND DECISION MAKING: A HYBRID QUALITATIVE STUDY
title_short 66: EXPLORING THE APPLICATION OF EVIDENCE IN THE IRANIAN NURSES' CLINICAL JUDGMENT AND DECISION MAKING: A HYBRID QUALITATIVE STUDY
title_sort 66: exploring the application of evidence in the iranian nurses' clinical judgment and decision making: a hybrid qualitative study
topic Abstracts from the 5th International Society for Evidence-Based Healthcare Congress, Kish Island, Ira
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5759541/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015415.66
work_keys_str_mv AT seidijamal 66exploringtheapplicationofevidenceintheiraniannursesclinicaljudgmentanddecisionmakingahybridqualitativestudy
AT alhanifatemah 66exploringtheapplicationofevidenceintheiraniannursesclinicaljudgmentanddecisionmakingahybridqualitativestudy
AT salsalimahvash 66exploringtheapplicationofevidenceintheiraniannursesclinicaljudgmentanddecisionmakingahybridqualitativestudy
AT kazemnejadanoushirvan 66exploringtheapplicationofevidenceintheiraniannursesclinicaljudgmentanddecisionmakingahybridqualitativestudy