• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Associations between perceptions of evidence and adoption of H1N1 influenza infection prevention strategies among healthcare workers providing care to

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
J Adv Nurs. 2013 Dec 16. doi: 10.1111/jan.12336. [Epub ahead of print]
Associations between perceptions of evidence and adoption of H1N1 influenza infection prevention strategies among healthcare workers providing care to persons with spinal cord injury.
Ullrich PM, Lavela SL, Evans CT, Miskevics S, Weaver FM, Goldstein B.
Author information
Abstract
AIM:

To examine associations between perceptions of evidence (research evidence, clinical expertise, patient preferences) and outcomes of a nationwide programme to implement H1N1 influenza prevention guidelines.
BACKGROUND:

Healthcare workers do not consistently adhere to recommended infection control practices and this may be associated with their perceptions of evidence sources.
DESIGN:

Cross-sectional mailed survey.
METHOD:

A survey of healthcare workers was administered in August 2010 after implementation of H1N1 prevention guidelines. Outcomes of interest were ratings of adherence to H1N1 prevention guidelines.
FINDINGS:

Respondents with complete data (N = 283) were included in analyses. Facility-level adherence to guidelines was associated with opinions of clinical experts. Healthcare workers who rated clinical expertise as aligning with recommendations also rated their facilities as being more adherent to guidelines. Perceptions of research evidence and patient preferences were not associated with facility adherence. Personal adherence was not associated with perceptions of evidence, except among those healthcare workers who rated both clinical experts and patients as unsupportive of guidelines; these practitioners were less likely to adhere to recommended personal hygiene practices.
CONCLUSION:

Efforts to implement guidelines might be most effective when capitalizing on the influence of clinical experts. To better explain variability in guideline adherence, inclusion of a broader array of variables is recommended for future studies.

Published 2013. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.
KEYWORDS:

adherence, evidence, guideline implementation, influenza prevention, nursing, promoting action on research implementation in health services

PMID:
24341504
[PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24341504
 
Back
Top Bottom