Effect of a Comprehensive Total Parenteral Nutrition Training Program on Knowledge and Practice of Nurses in NICU
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Parenteral nutrition is a lifesaving therapy for many infants who are unable to tolerate enteral feedings. It fulfils preterm neonates' needs for growth and development when their sizes or conditions preclude enteral feeding. Virtuous nursing care and close biochemical monitoring are absolutely essential for successful parenteral nutrition therapy. Since poor knowledge in parenteral nutrition can causes severe impairment to neonatal infants, the conduction of this study is essential. AIMS: The present study aims to: (1) examine the knowledge and practice of nurses in total parenteral nutrition (TPN); (2) employ training programs for improving knowledge and practice in management of TPN in new-borns. METHOD: A quasi-experimental study was carried out in Sarem Maternity Hospital in Tehran, Iran. The study population included nurses working in Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) who were included in the study using headcount census method (n=30). A two-part questionnaire including demographic information; 20 multiple choice questions on the nurses' knowledge of TPN therapy and 19-item 3-point Likert-type checklist on administration of TPN completed by observing the nurses' practice. To examine the reliability of the practice part, Cronbach's alpha method was used (α=0.78). Study interventions were mentoring education by the researcher and researcher-developed training manual and educational video and guidelines about neonatal parenteral nutrition. Before and after intervention data were collected and compared using paired t-test. RESULTS: The mean scores of nurses' knowledge before and afterward parenteral nutrition (PN) training program were 11.93±1.91 and 17.56±1.59, respectively. The mean scores of the nurses' practice earlier and after training program were 38.84±2.96 and 40.15±3.02, respectively. Comparing the mean scores of the nurses' familiarity, before and after taking the training course, demonstrated a significant difference (p<0.0001). The knowledge of the nurses in all areas of parenteral nutrition prescription was significantly improved after the employment of mentoring method (p<0.05). Despite an increase in the post-intervention total score, the nurses' practice, before and after, the intervention was not statistically significant (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: There is a breach between nursing knowledge and practice in prescribing parenteral nutrition. The gap between knowledge and practice in this area can lead to more morbidity and negative influences on the infant. Therefore, it is required that the gap between knowledge and practice is known as the infant gets less damage.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".