Evaluation of a COVID‐19 fundamental nursing care guideline versus usual care: The COVID‐NURSE cluster randomized controlled trial
Aim To evaluate the impact of usual care plus a fundamental nursing care guideline compared to usual care only for patients in hospital with COVID‐19 on patient experience, care quality, functional ability, treatment outcomes, nurses' moral distress, patient health‐related quality of life and c...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of advanced nursing 2024-05, Vol.80 (5), p.2137-2152 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 2152 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 2137 |
container_title | Journal of advanced nursing |
container_volume | 80 |
creator | Richards, David A. Bollen, Jess Jones, Ben Melendez‐Torres, G. J. Hulme, Claire Cockcroft, Emma Cook, Heather Cooper, Joanne Creanor, Siobhan Cruickshank, Susanne Dawe, Phoebe Doris, Faye Iles‐Smith, Heather Kent, Merryn Logan, Pip O'Connell, Abby Onysk, Jakub Owens, Rosie Quinn, Lynne Rafferty, Anne Marie Romanczuk, Lidia Russell, Anne Marie Shepherd, Maggie Singh, Sally J. Sugg, Holly V. R. Coon, Jo Thompson Tooze, Susannah Warren, Fiona C. Whale, Bethany Wootton, Stephen |
description | Aim
To evaluate the impact of usual care plus a fundamental nursing care guideline compared to usual care only for patients in hospital with COVID‐19 on patient experience, care quality, functional ability, treatment outcomes, nurses' moral distress, patient health‐related quality of life and cost‐effectiveness.
Design
Parallel two‐arm, cluster‐level randomized controlled trial.
Methods
Between 18th January and 20th December 2021, we recruited (i) adults aged 18 years and over with COVID‐19, excluding those invasively ventilated, admitted for at least three days or nights in UK Hospital Trusts; (ii) nurses caring for them. We randomly assigned hospitals to use a fundamental nursing care guideline and usual care or usual care only. Our patient‐reported co‐primary outcomes were the Relational Aspects of Care Questionnaire and four scales from the Quality from the Patient Perspective Questionnaire. We undertook intention‐to‐treat analyses.
Results
We randomized 15 clusters and recruited 581 patient and 418 nurse participants. Primary outcome data were available for 570–572 (98.1%–98.5%) patient participants in 14 clusters. We found no evidence of between‐group differences on any patient, nurse or economic outcomes. We found between‐group differences over time, in favour of the intervention, for three of our five co‐primary outcomes, and a significant interaction on one primary patient outcome for ethnicity (white British vs. other) and allocated group in favour of the intervention for the ‘other’ ethnicity subgroup.
Conclusion
We did not detect an overall difference in patient experience for a fundamental nursing care guideline compared to usual care. We have indications the guideline may have aided sustaining good practice over time and had a more positive impact on non‐white British patients' experience of care.
Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care
We cannot recommend the wholescale implementation of our guideline into routine nursing practice. Further intervention development, feasibility, pilot and evaluation studies are required.
Impact
Fundamental nursing care drives patient experience but is severely impacted in pandemics. Our guideline was not superior to usual care, albeit it may sustain good practice and have a positive impact on non‐white British patients' experience of care.
Reporting Method
CONSORT and CONSERVE.
Patient or Public Contribution
Patients with experience of hospitalization with COVID‐19 were involved in guideline devel |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/jan.15959 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2892269097</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3039634671</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3489-5eacfb0a8da1bff9a91f004c39599269c2594394204fa9a702bcfbe3f0a81fa33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kbtuVDEQhi0EIptAwQsgSzSkOIlv52K6aFkgKEokSGitWR87eOVjB_s4KFRU1DwjT4LDhhRIuBlL882nGf0IPaPkgNZ3uIFwQFvZygdoQXnXNqwTw0O0IJzIhgnCdtBuzhtCKGeMPUY7vJdD14p-gX6srsEXmF0MOFoMeHn26fj1r-8_qcS2hBEmE2bwOJSUXbjEGpLBl8WNxrtg8LVJuWRccqnMbe8VPv9s7iWnFx8-rrD2Jc8m4QRhjJP7ZkasY5hT9L5-5-TAP0GPLPhsnt7VPXTxZnW-fNecnL09Xh6dNJqLQTatAW3XBIYR6NpaCZJaQoTm9XbJOqlZKwWXghFhQUJP2Lryhts6Qi1wvodebr1XKX4pJs9qclkb7yGYWLJig2TVQ2Rf0Rf_oJtYUqjbKU647Ljoelqp_S2lU8w5Gauukpsg3ShK1G04qoaj_oRT2ed3xrKezHhP_k2jAodb4Kvz5ub_JvX-6HSr_A1CX5rH</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3039634671</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of a COVID‐19 fundamental nursing care guideline versus usual care: The COVID‐NURSE cluster randomized controlled trial</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Richards, David A. ; Bollen, Jess ; Jones, Ben ; Melendez‐Torres, G. J. ; Hulme, Claire ; Cockcroft, Emma ; Cook, Heather ; Cooper, Joanne ; Creanor, Siobhan ; Cruickshank, Susanne ; Dawe, Phoebe ; Doris, Faye ; Iles‐Smith, Heather ; Kent, Merryn ; Logan, Pip ; O'Connell, Abby ; Onysk, Jakub ; Owens, Rosie ; Quinn, Lynne ; Rafferty, Anne Marie ; Romanczuk, Lidia ; Russell, Anne Marie ; Shepherd, Maggie ; Singh, Sally J. ; Sugg, Holly V. R. ; Coon, Jo Thompson ; Tooze, Susannah ; Warren, Fiona C. ; Whale, Bethany ; Wootton, Stephen</creator><creatorcontrib>Richards, David A. ; Bollen, Jess ; Jones, Ben ; Melendez‐Torres, G. J. ; Hulme, Claire ; Cockcroft, Emma ; Cook, Heather ; Cooper, Joanne ; Creanor, Siobhan ; Cruickshank, Susanne ; Dawe, Phoebe ; Doris, Faye ; Iles‐Smith, Heather ; Kent, Merryn ; Logan, Pip ; O'Connell, Abby ; Onysk, Jakub ; Owens, Rosie ; Quinn, Lynne ; Rafferty, Anne Marie ; Romanczuk, Lidia ; Russell, Anne Marie ; Shepherd, Maggie ; Singh, Sally J. ; Sugg, Holly V. R. ; Coon, Jo Thompson ; Tooze, Susannah ; Warren, Fiona C. ; Whale, Bethany ; Wootton, Stephen</creatorcontrib><description>Aim
To evaluate the impact of usual care plus a fundamental nursing care guideline compared to usual care only for patients in hospital with COVID‐19 on patient experience, care quality, functional ability, treatment outcomes, nurses' moral distress, patient health‐related quality of life and cost‐effectiveness.
Design
Parallel two‐arm, cluster‐level randomized controlled trial.
Methods
Between 18th January and 20th December 2021, we recruited (i) adults aged 18 years and over with COVID‐19, excluding those invasively ventilated, admitted for at least three days or nights in UK Hospital Trusts; (ii) nurses caring for them. We randomly assigned hospitals to use a fundamental nursing care guideline and usual care or usual care only. Our patient‐reported co‐primary outcomes were the Relational Aspects of Care Questionnaire and four scales from the Quality from the Patient Perspective Questionnaire. We undertook intention‐to‐treat analyses.
Results
We randomized 15 clusters and recruited 581 patient and 418 nurse participants. Primary outcome data were available for 570–572 (98.1%–98.5%) patient participants in 14 clusters. We found no evidence of between‐group differences on any patient, nurse or economic outcomes. We found between‐group differences over time, in favour of the intervention, for three of our five co‐primary outcomes, and a significant interaction on one primary patient outcome for ethnicity (white British vs. other) and allocated group in favour of the intervention for the ‘other’ ethnicity subgroup.
Conclusion
We did not detect an overall difference in patient experience for a fundamental nursing care guideline compared to usual care. We have indications the guideline may have aided sustaining good practice over time and had a more positive impact on non‐white British patients' experience of care.
Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care
We cannot recommend the wholescale implementation of our guideline into routine nursing practice. Further intervention development, feasibility, pilot and evaluation studies are required.
Impact
Fundamental nursing care drives patient experience but is severely impacted in pandemics. Our guideline was not superior to usual care, albeit it may sustain good practice and have a positive impact on non‐white British patients' experience of care.
Reporting Method
CONSORT and CONSERVE.
Patient or Public Contribution
Patients with experience of hospitalization with COVID‐19 were involved in guideline development and writing, trial management and interpretation of findings.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0309-2402</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2648</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/jan.15959</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37986547</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Clinical outcomes ; Clinical trials ; cluster randomized controlled trial ; Cost analysis ; COVID-19 ; Ethnicity ; Feasibility ; fundamental nursing care ; Hospitalization ; Humans ; Intervention ; Nurses ; Nursing ; Nursing Care ; Pandemics ; patient experience ; Patients ; Professional practice ; Psychological distress ; Quality of care ; Quality of Life ; Questionnaires ; SARS‐COV‐2 ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Treatment Outcome ; Trusts</subject><ispartof>Journal of advanced nursing, 2024-05, Vol.80 (5), p.2137-2152</ispartof><rights>2023 The Authors. published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2023 The Authors. Journal of Advanced Nursing published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2023. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3489-5eacfb0a8da1bff9a91f004c39599269c2594394204fa9a702bcfbe3f0a81fa33</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-0468-3537 ; 0000-0002-8821-5027</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fjan.15959$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fjan.15959$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,30976,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37986547$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Richards, David A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bollen, Jess</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Ben</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melendez‐Torres, G. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hulme, Claire</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cockcroft, Emma</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cook, Heather</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cooper, Joanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Creanor, Siobhan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cruickshank, Susanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dawe, Phoebe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doris, Faye</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iles‐Smith, Heather</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kent, Merryn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Logan, Pip</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O'Connell, Abby</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Onysk, Jakub</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Owens, Rosie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quinn, Lynne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rafferty, Anne Marie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Romanczuk, Lidia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Russell, Anne Marie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shepherd, Maggie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, Sally J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sugg, Holly V. R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coon, Jo Thompson</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tooze, Susannah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Warren, Fiona C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whale, Bethany</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wootton, Stephen</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of a COVID‐19 fundamental nursing care guideline versus usual care: The COVID‐NURSE cluster randomized controlled trial</title><title>Journal of advanced nursing</title><addtitle>J Adv Nurs</addtitle><description>Aim
To evaluate the impact of usual care plus a fundamental nursing care guideline compared to usual care only for patients in hospital with COVID‐19 on patient experience, care quality, functional ability, treatment outcomes, nurses' moral distress, patient health‐related quality of life and cost‐effectiveness.
Design
Parallel two‐arm, cluster‐level randomized controlled trial.
Methods
Between 18th January and 20th December 2021, we recruited (i) adults aged 18 years and over with COVID‐19, excluding those invasively ventilated, admitted for at least three days or nights in UK Hospital Trusts; (ii) nurses caring for them. We randomly assigned hospitals to use a fundamental nursing care guideline and usual care or usual care only. Our patient‐reported co‐primary outcomes were the Relational Aspects of Care Questionnaire and four scales from the Quality from the Patient Perspective Questionnaire. We undertook intention‐to‐treat analyses.
Results
We randomized 15 clusters and recruited 581 patient and 418 nurse participants. Primary outcome data were available for 570–572 (98.1%–98.5%) patient participants in 14 clusters. We found no evidence of between‐group differences on any patient, nurse or economic outcomes. We found between‐group differences over time, in favour of the intervention, for three of our five co‐primary outcomes, and a significant interaction on one primary patient outcome for ethnicity (white British vs. other) and allocated group in favour of the intervention for the ‘other’ ethnicity subgroup.
Conclusion
We did not detect an overall difference in patient experience for a fundamental nursing care guideline compared to usual care. We have indications the guideline may have aided sustaining good practice over time and had a more positive impact on non‐white British patients' experience of care.
Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care
We cannot recommend the wholescale implementation of our guideline into routine nursing practice. Further intervention development, feasibility, pilot and evaluation studies are required.
Impact
Fundamental nursing care drives patient experience but is severely impacted in pandemics. Our guideline was not superior to usual care, albeit it may sustain good practice and have a positive impact on non‐white British patients' experience of care.
Reporting Method
CONSORT and CONSERVE.
Patient or Public Contribution
Patients with experience of hospitalization with COVID‐19 were involved in guideline development and writing, trial management and interpretation of findings.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Clinical outcomes</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>cluster randomized controlled trial</subject><subject>Cost analysis</subject><subject>COVID-19</subject><subject>Ethnicity</subject><subject>Feasibility</subject><subject>fundamental nursing care</subject><subject>Hospitalization</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intervention</subject><subject>Nurses</subject><subject>Nursing</subject><subject>Nursing Care</subject><subject>Pandemics</subject><subject>patient experience</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Professional practice</subject><subject>Psychological distress</subject><subject>Quality of care</subject><subject>Quality of Life</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>SARS‐COV‐2</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Trusts</subject><issn>0309-2402</issn><issn>1365-2648</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kbtuVDEQhi0EIptAwQsgSzSkOIlv52K6aFkgKEokSGitWR87eOVjB_s4KFRU1DwjT4LDhhRIuBlL882nGf0IPaPkgNZ3uIFwQFvZygdoQXnXNqwTw0O0IJzIhgnCdtBuzhtCKGeMPUY7vJdD14p-gX6srsEXmF0MOFoMeHn26fj1r-8_qcS2hBEmE2bwOJSUXbjEGpLBl8WNxrtg8LVJuWRccqnMbe8VPv9s7iWnFx8-rrD2Jc8m4QRhjJP7ZkasY5hT9L5-5-TAP0GPLPhsnt7VPXTxZnW-fNecnL09Xh6dNJqLQTatAW3XBIYR6NpaCZJaQoTm9XbJOqlZKwWXghFhQUJP2Lryhts6Qi1wvodebr1XKX4pJs9qclkb7yGYWLJig2TVQ2Rf0Rf_oJtYUqjbKU647Ljoelqp_S2lU8w5Gauukpsg3ShK1G04qoaj_oRT2ed3xrKezHhP_k2jAodb4Kvz5ub_JvX-6HSr_A1CX5rH</recordid><startdate>202405</startdate><enddate>202405</enddate><creator>Richards, David A.</creator><creator>Bollen, Jess</creator><creator>Jones, Ben</creator><creator>Melendez‐Torres, G. J.</creator><creator>Hulme, Claire</creator><creator>Cockcroft, Emma</creator><creator>Cook, Heather</creator><creator>Cooper, Joanne</creator><creator>Creanor, Siobhan</creator><creator>Cruickshank, Susanne</creator><creator>Dawe, Phoebe</creator><creator>Doris, Faye</creator><creator>Iles‐Smith, Heather</creator><creator>Kent, Merryn</creator><creator>Logan, Pip</creator><creator>O'Connell, Abby</creator><creator>Onysk, Jakub</creator><creator>Owens, Rosie</creator><creator>Quinn, Lynne</creator><creator>Rafferty, Anne Marie</creator><creator>Romanczuk, Lidia</creator><creator>Russell, Anne Marie</creator><creator>Shepherd, Maggie</creator><creator>Singh, Sally J.</creator><creator>Sugg, Holly V. R.</creator><creator>Coon, Jo Thompson</creator><creator>Tooze, Susannah</creator><creator>Warren, Fiona C.</creator><creator>Whale, Bethany</creator><creator>Wootton, Stephen</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0468-3537</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8821-5027</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202405</creationdate><title>Evaluation of a COVID‐19 fundamental nursing care guideline versus usual care: The COVID‐NURSE cluster randomized controlled trial</title><author>Richards, David A. ; Bollen, Jess ; Jones, Ben ; Melendez‐Torres, G. J. ; Hulme, Claire ; Cockcroft, Emma ; Cook, Heather ; Cooper, Joanne ; Creanor, Siobhan ; Cruickshank, Susanne ; Dawe, Phoebe ; Doris, Faye ; Iles‐Smith, Heather ; Kent, Merryn ; Logan, Pip ; O'Connell, Abby ; Onysk, Jakub ; Owens, Rosie ; Quinn, Lynne ; Rafferty, Anne Marie ; Romanczuk, Lidia ; Russell, Anne Marie ; Shepherd, Maggie ; Singh, Sally J. ; Sugg, Holly V. R. ; Coon, Jo Thompson ; Tooze, Susannah ; Warren, Fiona C. ; Whale, Bethany ; Wootton, Stephen</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3489-5eacfb0a8da1bff9a91f004c39599269c2594394204fa9a702bcfbe3f0a81fa33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Clinical outcomes</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>cluster randomized controlled trial</topic><topic>Cost analysis</topic><topic>COVID-19</topic><topic>Ethnicity</topic><topic>Feasibility</topic><topic>fundamental nursing care</topic><topic>Hospitalization</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intervention</topic><topic>Nurses</topic><topic>Nursing</topic><topic>Nursing Care</topic><topic>Pandemics</topic><topic>patient experience</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Professional practice</topic><topic>Psychological distress</topic><topic>Quality of care</topic><topic>Quality of Life</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>SARS‐COV‐2</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Trusts</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Richards, David A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bollen, Jess</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Ben</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melendez‐Torres, G. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hulme, Claire</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cockcroft, Emma</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cook, Heather</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cooper, Joanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Creanor, Siobhan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cruickshank, Susanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dawe, Phoebe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doris, Faye</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iles‐Smith, Heather</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kent, Merryn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Logan, Pip</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O'Connell, Abby</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Onysk, Jakub</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Owens, Rosie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quinn, Lynne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rafferty, Anne Marie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Romanczuk, Lidia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Russell, Anne Marie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shepherd, Maggie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, Sally J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sugg, Holly V. R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coon, Jo Thompson</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tooze, Susannah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Warren, Fiona C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whale, Bethany</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wootton, Stephen</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of advanced nursing</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Richards, David A.</au><au>Bollen, Jess</au><au>Jones, Ben</au><au>Melendez‐Torres, G. J.</au><au>Hulme, Claire</au><au>Cockcroft, Emma</au><au>Cook, Heather</au><au>Cooper, Joanne</au><au>Creanor, Siobhan</au><au>Cruickshank, Susanne</au><au>Dawe, Phoebe</au><au>Doris, Faye</au><au>Iles‐Smith, Heather</au><au>Kent, Merryn</au><au>Logan, Pip</au><au>O'Connell, Abby</au><au>Onysk, Jakub</au><au>Owens, Rosie</au><au>Quinn, Lynne</au><au>Rafferty, Anne Marie</au><au>Romanczuk, Lidia</au><au>Russell, Anne Marie</au><au>Shepherd, Maggie</au><au>Singh, Sally J.</au><au>Sugg, Holly V. R.</au><au>Coon, Jo Thompson</au><au>Tooze, Susannah</au><au>Warren, Fiona C.</au><au>Whale, Bethany</au><au>Wootton, Stephen</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of a COVID‐19 fundamental nursing care guideline versus usual care: The COVID‐NURSE cluster randomized controlled trial</atitle><jtitle>Journal of advanced nursing</jtitle><addtitle>J Adv Nurs</addtitle><date>2024-05</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>80</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>2137</spage><epage>2152</epage><pages>2137-2152</pages><issn>0309-2402</issn><eissn>1365-2648</eissn><abstract>Aim
To evaluate the impact of usual care plus a fundamental nursing care guideline compared to usual care only for patients in hospital with COVID‐19 on patient experience, care quality, functional ability, treatment outcomes, nurses' moral distress, patient health‐related quality of life and cost‐effectiveness.
Design
Parallel two‐arm, cluster‐level randomized controlled trial.
Methods
Between 18th January and 20th December 2021, we recruited (i) adults aged 18 years and over with COVID‐19, excluding those invasively ventilated, admitted for at least three days or nights in UK Hospital Trusts; (ii) nurses caring for them. We randomly assigned hospitals to use a fundamental nursing care guideline and usual care or usual care only. Our patient‐reported co‐primary outcomes were the Relational Aspects of Care Questionnaire and four scales from the Quality from the Patient Perspective Questionnaire. We undertook intention‐to‐treat analyses.
Results
We randomized 15 clusters and recruited 581 patient and 418 nurse participants. Primary outcome data were available for 570–572 (98.1%–98.5%) patient participants in 14 clusters. We found no evidence of between‐group differences on any patient, nurse or economic outcomes. We found between‐group differences over time, in favour of the intervention, for three of our five co‐primary outcomes, and a significant interaction on one primary patient outcome for ethnicity (white British vs. other) and allocated group in favour of the intervention for the ‘other’ ethnicity subgroup.
Conclusion
We did not detect an overall difference in patient experience for a fundamental nursing care guideline compared to usual care. We have indications the guideline may have aided sustaining good practice over time and had a more positive impact on non‐white British patients' experience of care.
Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care
We cannot recommend the wholescale implementation of our guideline into routine nursing practice. Further intervention development, feasibility, pilot and evaluation studies are required.
Impact
Fundamental nursing care drives patient experience but is severely impacted in pandemics. Our guideline was not superior to usual care, albeit it may sustain good practice and have a positive impact on non‐white British patients' experience of care.
Reporting Method
CONSORT and CONSERVE.
Patient or Public Contribution
Patients with experience of hospitalization with COVID‐19 were involved in guideline development and writing, trial management and interpretation of findings.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>37986547</pmid><doi>10.1111/jan.15959</doi><tpages>16</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0468-3537</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8821-5027</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0309-2402 |
ispartof | Journal of advanced nursing, 2024-05, Vol.80 (5), p.2137-2152 |
issn | 0309-2402 1365-2648 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2892269097 |
source | Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
subjects | Adolescent Adult Clinical outcomes Clinical trials cluster randomized controlled trial Cost analysis COVID-19 Ethnicity Feasibility fundamental nursing care Hospitalization Humans Intervention Nurses Nursing Nursing Care Pandemics patient experience Patients Professional practice Psychological distress Quality of care Quality of Life Questionnaires SARS‐COV‐2 Surveys and Questionnaires Treatment Outcome Trusts |
title | Evaluation of a COVID‐19 fundamental nursing care guideline versus usual care: The COVID‐NURSE cluster randomized controlled trial |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T18%3A59%3A48IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20a%20COVID%E2%80%9019%20fundamental%20nursing%20care%20guideline%20versus%20usual%20care:%20The%20COVID%E2%80%90NURSE%20cluster%20randomized%20controlled%20trial&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20advanced%20nursing&rft.au=Richards,%20David%20A.&rft.date=2024-05&rft.volume=80&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=2137&rft.epage=2152&rft.pages=2137-2152&rft.issn=0309-2402&rft.eissn=1365-2648&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/jan.15959&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3039634671%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3039634671&rft_id=info:pmid/37986547&rfr_iscdi=true |