| Title |
Can education improve clinical practice concerning delirium in older hospitalised patients? Results of a pre-test post-test study on an educational intervention for nursing staff
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Education, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12909-018-1177-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eveline L. van Velthuijsen, Sandra M. G. Zwakhalen, Ron M. J. Warnier, Ton Ambergen, Wubbo J. Mulder, Frans R. J. Verhey, Gertrudis I. J. M. Kempen |
| Abstract |
Delirium is a common and serious complication of hospitalisation in older adults. It can lead to prolonged hospital stay, institutionalisation, and even death. However, it often remains unrecognised or is not managed adequately. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of an educational intervention for nursing staff on three aspects of clinical practice concerning delirium in older hospitalised patients: the frequency and correctness of screening for delirium using the 13-item Delirium Observation Screening score (DOS), and the frequency of geriatric consultations requested for older patients. The a priori expectations were that there would be an increase in all three of these outcomes. We designed an educational intervention and implemented this on two inpatient hospital units. Before providing the educational session, the nursing staff was asked to fill out two questionnaires about delirium in older hospitalised patients. The educational session was then tailored to each unit based on the results of these questionnaires. Additionally, posters and flyers with information on the screening and management of delirium were provided and participants were shown where to find additional information. Relevant data (outcomes, demographics and background patient data) were collected retrospectively from digital medical files. Data was retrospectively collected for four different time points: three pre-test and one post-test. There was a significant increase in frequency of delirium screening (P = 0.001), and both units showed an increase in the correctness of the screening. No significant effect of the educational intervention was found for the proportion of patients who received a geriatric consultation (P = 0.083). The educational intervention was fairly successful in making positive changes in clinical practice: after the educational session an improvement in the frequency and correctness of screening for delirium was observed. A trend, though not significant, towards an increase in the proportion of geriatric consultations for older hospitalised patients was also observed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 10 | 53% |
| Spain | 2 | 11% |
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| France | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 5 | 26% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 58% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 21% |
| Scientists | 4 | 21% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 82 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 21 | 26% |
| Unknown | 21 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 22% |
| Psychology | 4 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 12% |
| Unknown | 21 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 January 2019.
All research outputs
#3,414,628
of 25,402,889 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#593
of 3,988 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,291
of 342,800 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#22
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,402,889 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,988 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,800 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.