MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2778942550 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018226

Qualitative investigation of the perceptions and experiences of nursing and allied health professionals involved in the implementation of an enriched environment in an Australian acute stroke unit

2017· article· en· W2778942550 on OpenAlexafffund
Ingrid Rosbergen, Sandra Brauer, Sarah Fitzhenry, Rohan Grimley, Kathryn S. Hayward

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMedical Research CouncilIndian Council of Medical ResearchMichael Smith Health Research BCUniversity of QueenslandQueensland HealthNational Health and Medical Research CouncilWishlist
KeywordsThematic analysisMedicineFocus groupWorkloadNursingUnit (ring theory)Qualitative researchAcute strokePerceptionPsychologyEmergency department

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: An enriched environment embedded in an acute stroke unit can increase activity levels of patients who had stroke, with changes sustained 6 months post-implementation. The objective of this study was to understand perceptions and experiences of nursing and allied health professionals involved in implementing an enriched environment in an acute stroke unit. DESIGN: A descriptive qualitative approach. SETTING: An acute stroke unit in a regional Australian hospital. PARTICIPANTS: We purposively recruited three allied health and seven nursing professionals involved in the delivery of the enriched environment. Face-to-face, semistructured interviews were conducted 8 weeks post-completion of the enriched environment study. One independent researcher completed all interviews. Voice-recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed by three researchers using a thematic approach to identify main themes. RESULTS: Three themes were identified. First, staff perceived that 'the road to recovery had started' for patients. An enriched environment was described to shift the focus to recovery in the acute setting, which was experienced through increased patient activity, greater psychological well-being and empowering patients and families. Second, 'it takes a team' to successfully create an enriched environment. Integral to building the team were positive interdisciplinary team dynamics and education. The impact of the enriched environment on workload was diversely experienced by staff. Third, 'keeping it going' was perceived to be challenging. Staff reflected that changing work routines was difficult. Contextual factors such as a supportive physical environment and variety in individual enrichment opportunities were indicated to enhance implementation. Key to sustaining change was consistency in staff and use of change management strategies. CONCLUSION: Investigating staff perceptions and experiences of an enrichment model in an acute stroke unit highlighted the need for effective teamwork. To facilitate staff in their new work practice, careful selection of change management strategies are critical to support clinical translation of an enriched environment. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ANZCTN12614000679684; Results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.226
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207