Impact of Structured Nurse Leader Rounds on Satisfaction With Nursing Care Among Patients With Cancer

What Nursing-Sensitive Outcomes Have Been Investigated to Date among Patients with Solid and Hematological Malignancies? A Scoping Review

Nursing-sensitive outcomes are those outcomes attributable to nursing care. To date three main reviews have summarized the evidence available regarding the nursing outcomes in onco-haematological care. Updating the existing reviews was the main intent of this study; specifically, the aim was to map the state of the art of the science in the field of oncology nursing-sensitive outcomes and to summarise outcomes and metrics documented as being influenced by nursing care. A scoping review was conducted in 2021. The MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were examined. Qualitative and quantitative primary and secondary studies concerning patients with solid/haematological malignancies, cared for in any setting, published in English, and from any time were all included. Both inductive and deductive approaches were used to analyse the data extracted from the studies. Sixty studies have been included, mostly primary (n = 57, 95.0%) with a quasi- or experimental approach (n = 26, 55.3%), conducted among Europe (n = 27, 45.0%), in hospitals and clinical wards (n = 29, 48.3%), and including from 8 to 4615 patients. In the inductive analysis, there emerged 151 outcomes grouped into 38 categories, with the top category being 'Satisfaction and perception of nursing care received' (n = 32, 21.2%). Outcome measurement systems included mainly self-report questionnaires (n = 89, 66.9%). In the deductive analysis, according to the Oncology Nursing Society 2004 classification, the 'Symptom control and management' domain was the most investigated (n = 44, 29.1%); however, the majority (n = 50, 33.1%) of nursing-sensitive outcomes that emerged were not includible in the available framework. Continuing to map nursing outcomes may be useful for clinicians, managers, educators, and researchers in establishing the endpoints of their practice. The ample number of instruments and metrics that emerged suggests the need for more development of homogeneous assessment systems allowing comparison across health issues, settings, and countries.

Nurse manager intentional rounding and outcomes: Findings of a systematic review

AIM

To summarize the evidence available on Nurse Manager Intentional Rounding (NMIR) describing the main characteristics and methodological quality of studies available, the features of rounding and the outcomes as measured to date.

DESIGN

A systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases, including MEDLINE-EBSCHOST, PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane, Clinicalkey, ScienceDirect, OVID, Sage Journals and Web of Science, were searched up to June 2021.

REVIEW METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement guideline was used to summarize methods and report findings. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools were used to evaluate the methodology quality of the studies included.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included with pre-post-test (n = 3), longitudinal, two-group post-tests, quasi-experimental, and retrospective study designs (n = 1, respectively). In five studies, the nurse managers were trained to conduct the rounding, which was shaped according to three main features: a structured (n = 4), a semi-structured (n = 1) and an unstructured rounding (n = 2) delivered from high (twice a day 7/7) to low intensity (once a day, 5/7). Two main outcomes have been measured to date, the patient satisfaction and some aspects related to the care quality. Five studies reported that the satisfaction scores of patients who received rounding were significantly higher than that perceived by patients not receiving rounding. About the other aspects of the quality of care, two studies documented significant improvements as a consequence of the NMIR (e.g. information accessibility, discharge instructions, coordination of care after discharge).

CONCLUSION

Studies available report in general a low methodological quality, mainly due to their pragmatic nature as quality improvement projects. Therefore, transforming this field of research by establishing a methodological rigour and a theoretical foundation in both interventions and outcomes and by designing experimental approaches, might expand the evidence available on the effects of nurse managers intentional rounding.