Nursing knowledge and methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus : implications for community health nursing in First Nations communities [research project] / by Cheryl A. Chisholm.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has emerged as a serious \nnosocomial and community-associated pathogen in aboriginal people in Canada \n(Canadian Pediatric Society, 2005). A recent survey with First Nations employed \ncommunity health nurses (CHNs) in the Atlantic region found that nursing knowledge is \nlowest in the area of emerging infections such as MRSA (Mi?kmaq Confederacy of \nPrince Edward Island, 2009). The objective of this project is to review the nursing \nliterature on this topic and to describe the factors that contribute to low nursing \nknowledge of MRSA. A search of the literature published during 2000-2008 using \nMedline, CINAHL with full text, DARE, and CDSR was conducted using the following \nsearch terms: ?community-acquired MRSA?, ?hospital-associated MRSA?, ?hospital acquired \nMRSA?, ?community-associated MRSA?, ?MRSA?, ?community health \nnursing?, ?nurse? ?nursing?, ?antibiotic resistant organisms?, ?nosocomial infections? \nand ?knowledge?. The search generated 48 papers for review. For each paper, \ninformation was obtained on the study population, health care setting (acute or \ncommunity), geographic location of the research, and the study type. Publications were \nsorted by topic area MRSA (CA-MRSA, HA-MRSA or both) or nosocomial infections. \nThe articles were also organized into key theme areas for further description. Sixty-two \nand one half percent (30) of the papers referred to healthcare workers as the study \npopulation (nurses, doctors, aides, dentists). Nurses were the primary study population in \n37.5% (18) of the papers, with only three of these papers focused on community health \nnurses. The research in this area has emerged from the United Kingdom (37.5%) and the \nUnited States (35%), with a paucity of research on this topic in Canada (15%) and the rest of the world. Sixty-two and one half percent of the papers focused on MRSA with \ntwo of the papers discussing CA-MRSA, Thirty-seven and one half percent of the papers \nfocused on the broader topic of nosocomial infections. Acute care is the most common \nsetting for research in this area (73%). Only five articles were found on this topic in a \ncommunity setting. The majority of literature available addresses MRSA knowledge \ndeficits and strategies to address them. There is limited literature published on the factors \ncontributing to low nursing knowledge of MRSA. The review suggests that a gap exists \nin infection control content in nursing curriculum at the undergraduate level and between \nnurses? reported knowledge and practice. The review also suggests that nurses? personal \nway of knowing contributes to their knowledge ofMRSA. Further research is required \non these factors. Additional research on this topic is needed in Canada and in a variety of \nnursing practice settings. Nurses employed in First Nations communities warrant \nincreased attention considering the implications of MRSA in aboriginal people.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».