↓ Skip to main content

Education and practice gaps on atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation: a survey of cardiovascular nurses

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
15 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Education and practice gaps on atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation: a survey of cardiovascular nurses
Published in
BMC Medical Education, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12909-015-0504-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caleb Ferguson, Sally C. Inglis, Phillip J. Newton, Sandy Middleton, Peter S. Macdonald, Patricia M. Davidson

Abstract

Patients' knowledge of their atrial fibrillation (AF) and anticoagulation therapy are determinants of the efficacy of thromboprophylaxis. Nurses may be well placed to provide counselling and education to patients on all aspects of anticoagulation, including self-management. It is important that nurses are well informed to provide optimal education to patients. Current practice and knowledge of cardiovascular nurses on AF and anticoagulation in the Australian and New Zealand (ANZ) context is not well reported. This study aimed to; 1) Explore the nurse's role in clinical decision making in anticoagulation in the setting of AF; 2) Describe perceived barriers and enablers to anticoagulation in AF; 3) Investigate practice patterns in the management of anticoagulation in the ANZ setting; 4) Assess cardiovascular nurses' knowledge of anticoagulation. A paper-based survey on current practices and knowledge of AF and anticoagulation was distributed during the Australian Cardiovascular Nursing College (ACNC) Annual Scientific Meeting, February 2014. This survey was also emailed to Cardiovascular Trials Nurses throughout New South Wales, Australia and nursing members of the Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand (CSANZ). There were 41/73 (56 %) respondents to the paper-based survey. A further 14 surveys were completed online via nurse members of the CSANZ, and via an investigator developed NSW cardiovascular trials nurse email distribution list. A total of 55 surveys were completed and included in analyses. Prior education levels on AF, stroke risk, anticoagulation and health behaviour modification were mixed. The CHA2DS2VASc and HAS-BLED risk stratification tools were reported to be underused by this group of clinicians. Reported key barriers to anticoagulation included; fears of patients falling, fears of poor adherence to medication taking and routine monitoring. Patient self-monitoring and self-management were reported as underutilised. ANZ cardiovascular nurses reported their key role to be counselling and advising patients on therapy regimens. Anticoagulant-drug interaction knowledge was generally poor. This study identified poor knowledge and practice in the areas of AF and anticoagulation. There is scope for improvement for cardiovascular nurses in ANZ in relation to AF and anticoagulation knowledge and practice.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 75 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 19%
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Other 20 26%
Unknown 9 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 25 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 23%
Psychology 3 4%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 16 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 23 July 2017.
All research outputs
#847,199
of 15,917,790 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#105
of 2,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,277
of 372,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#9
of 192 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,917,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,251 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 372,317 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 192 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.