MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790549992 · doi:10.1111/inr.12438

Nursing wound care practices in Haiti: facilitators and barriers to quality care

2018· article· en· W2790549992 on OpenAlexaff
Bernard Timmins, C. Thomas Riché, Michèle Saint-Jean, J. Porter Tuck, Lisa Merry

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Nursing Review · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfection Control in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingWound careMedicineQuality (philosophy)Intensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To describe the facilitators and barriers for nurses to perform quality wound care in three surgical wards of a hospital in Port-au-Prince, Haiti. BACKGROUND: Up to a quarter of patients in low- and middle-income countries may acquire at least one infection while hospitalized. There is a paucity of research investigating nursing wound care practices in low- and middle-income countries regarding the prevention of hospital-acquired infections. METHODS: The design was qualitative descriptive. We observed nursing staff on the general surgery, orthopaedics and maternity units while they performed routine dressing changes (n = 15). We interviewed nursing (n = 13) and medical residents (n = 3) and inquired about their perceptions of facilitators and barriers for nurses to perform quality wound care. FINDINGS: A number of wound care practices appeared well integrated including using gloves to remove dressings, applying sterile dressings, properly disposing of soiled materials, inspecting wounds for signs of infection and employing comfort and privacy measures. Areas that may need improvement included aseptic technique, hand hygiene, pain assessments, patient education and documentation. We identified four themes related to barriers and facilitators to perform quality wound care: (i) materials and resources; (ii) nurse-to-patient ratios, workload and support; (iii) roles and responsibilities of nurses; and (iv) knowledge and training of nurses. CONCLUSION: Nursing wound care practices may be optimized by improving nurses' professional status and working conditions. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE AND HEALTH POLICY: Greater financial investment in health care and (continuing) education, self-regulation and development of the nursing role, including more autonomy, are needed to elevate the professional status of nurses in Haiti. Institutional policies should promote best practices, clarify nursing roles and responsibilities and foster interdisciplinary collaboration in patient care.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.427 · 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

Citations33
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Nursing ReviewSame topicInfection Control in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207