![]() ![]() The findings of this study corroborate earlier research: student nurses do not feel well-prepared to undertake aseptic technique. Reports of better innovation in one of the participating sites compared to standard practice in the other were not reflected in the data. Suboptimal facilities, poor curriculum design and arrangements for competency assessment in both sites contributed to students' experiences. There were misunderstandings and confusion about its purpose and how it should be conducted among nurse educators and mentors. Student nurses reported feeling poorly prepared to undertake aseptic technique. Telephone interviews, fieldwork and unstructured observation of teaching in the universities. Student nurses, university-based nurse educators, clinical mentors and infection prevention nurses. Each site comprised a university nursing department and the organisations providing student placements. Two contrasting sites, one reporting greater innovation in relation to the teaching and practice of aseptic technique than the other. Qualitative interview study with observation of teaching. The authors thank the nurses for providing data.Īseptic technique is essential to prevent healthcare-associated infection and reduce the risk of antimicrobial resistance but little research has explored how it is taught in undergraduate nursing curricula.Įxplore how undergraduate student nurses learn about aseptic technique in classroom and clinical settings and the contribution of key stakeholders in the educational process: nurse educators, mentors and infection prevention nurses. The authors thank the Welsh Government, United Kingdom for providing financial support for this study. ![]() Possible improvements include renewed emphasis during initial nurse education, greater opportunity for updating knowledge and skills post-qualification, and audit of practice. Further studies should establish the generalizability of our findings. Nurses' understanding of the principles of asepsis could be improved. The earlier studies did not explore comprehension of the concepts of sterility and cleanliness, which are central to understanding and conducting aseptic technique, and did not document opportunities Conclusion The results corroborate the findings of earlier, much smaller studies.6, 7 Our study is more comprehensive than earlier research. ![]() This study indicates that nurses' understanding of aseptic technique may lack accuracy and completeness and thereby place patients and staff at risk of cross-infection. No significant differences in response between hospitals was found. Most were in clinical posts in junior (n = 125 68.1%) or middle levels of seniority (n = 32 17.6%). ![]() Questionnaires were completed by 180 registered nurses (72% response rate). This survey was undertaken with nurses because, in the UK, they are the professional group mainly responsible for undertaking wound dressing, urinary catheterization, and removal of intravenous lines for inpatients. The aims of the current study were to determine nurses' understanding of the term “aseptic technique,” their confidence in undertaking it, and what opportunities they have to update their knowledge and skills and undergo periodic reassessment to maintain competency. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |