Perceptions of hospital manual handling policy and impact on nursing team involvement in promoting patients' mobility

Rosie Kneafsey, C. Clifford, S. Greenfield

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Aims and objectives: To report the findings gained from interviews with hospital nurses and care assistants, regarding the impact of hospital manual handling policies on their role in maintaining and promoting patients' mobility. Background: Older hospitalised adults often experience deteriorations in mobility, which are often partially caused by protective or custodial care practice and environments that promote patient dependency. Hospital-induced mobility loss may be conceptualised as a problematic source of iatrogenic patient harm, worthy of attention from a patient safety standpoint. Preventative rehabilitation nursing interventions have the potential to prevent mobility loss. Design: Grounded theory study. Methods: Data were collected in three clinical settings: general rehabilitation, spinal injuries and stroke rehabilitation. Semi-structured interviews with 39 rehabilitation staff were completed. Results: Perceptions of hospital manual handling policy were described via four subcategories: policy as stimulus to improved practice; policy as divorced from reality; policy as threat; and policy as hindrance to rehabilitation. Conclusions: Hospital manual handling policy was perceived negatively by some nursing team members both as a threat and as a barrier to patients' rehabilitation. Risk aversion, divided teamwork practices and overuse of patient handling equipment were matters of concern. Relevance to clinical practice: Perceptions of hospital manual handling policy should be openly discussed by nursing managers and direct care providers. It is important to recognise that beliefs about and perceptions of policy will often impact later on staff practices and behaviours. Unintended consequences arising from dominant interpretations of manual handling policy must be acknowledged and risks identified. It is important that practitioners balance risk assessment and prevention of falls with patients' needs for mobilisation.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)289–299
JournalJournal of Clinical Nursing
Volume24
Issue number1-2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015

Fingerprint

Team Nursing
Rehabilitation
Custodial Care
Rehabilitation Nursing
Interviews
Patient Harm
Moving and Lifting Patients
Spinal Injuries
Divorce
Patient Safety
Nursing
Nurses

Bibliographical note

The full text of this item is not available from the repository.

Keywords

  • care assistants
  • hospital
  • mobility
  • nursing
  • policy
  • rehabilitation
  • teamwork

Cite this

Perceptions of hospital manual handling policy and impact on nursing team involvement in promoting patients' mobility. / Kneafsey, Rosie; Clifford, C.; Greenfield, S.

In: Journal of Clinical Nursing, Vol. 24, No. 1-2, 2015, p. 289–299.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kneafsey, Rosie ; Clifford, C. ; Greenfield, S. / Perceptions of hospital manual handling policy and impact on nursing team involvement in promoting patients' mobility. In: Journal of Clinical Nursing. 2015 ; Vol. 24, No. 1-2. pp. 289–299.
@article{90d7cb17e9684069b8517ec575fee1d8,
title = "Perceptions of hospital manual handling policy and impact on nursing team involvement in promoting patients' mobility",
abstract = "Aims and objectives: To report the findings gained from interviews with hospital nurses and care assistants, regarding the impact of hospital manual handling policies on their role in maintaining and promoting patients' mobility. Background: Older hospitalised adults often experience deteriorations in mobility, which are often partially caused by protective or custodial care practice and environments that promote patient dependency. Hospital-induced mobility loss may be conceptualised as a problematic source of iatrogenic patient harm, worthy of attention from a patient safety standpoint. Preventative rehabilitation nursing interventions have the potential to prevent mobility loss. Design: Grounded theory study. Methods: Data were collected in three clinical settings: general rehabilitation, spinal injuries and stroke rehabilitation. Semi-structured interviews with 39 rehabilitation staff were completed. Results: Perceptions of hospital manual handling policy were described via four subcategories: policy as stimulus to improved practice; policy as divorced from reality; policy as threat; and policy as hindrance to rehabilitation. Conclusions: Hospital manual handling policy was perceived negatively by some nursing team members both as a threat and as a barrier to patients' rehabilitation. Risk aversion, divided teamwork practices and overuse of patient handling equipment were matters of concern. Relevance to clinical practice: Perceptions of hospital manual handling policy should be openly discussed by nursing managers and direct care providers. It is important to recognise that beliefs about and perceptions of policy will often impact later on staff practices and behaviours. Unintended consequences arising from dominant interpretations of manual handling policy must be acknowledged and risks identified. It is important that practitioners balance risk assessment and prevention of falls with patients' needs for mobilisation.",
keywords = "care assistants, hospital, mobility, nursing, policy, rehabilitation, teamwork",
author = "Rosie Kneafsey and C. Clifford and S. Greenfield",
note = "The full text of this item is not available from the repository.",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1111/jocn.12659",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "289–299",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Nursing",
issn = "0962-1067",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "1-2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Perceptions of hospital manual handling policy and impact on nursing team involvement in promoting patients' mobility

AU - Kneafsey, Rosie

AU - Clifford, C.

AU - Greenfield, S.

N1 - The full text of this item is not available from the repository.

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Aims and objectives: To report the findings gained from interviews with hospital nurses and care assistants, regarding the impact of hospital manual handling policies on their role in maintaining and promoting patients' mobility. Background: Older hospitalised adults often experience deteriorations in mobility, which are often partially caused by protective or custodial care practice and environments that promote patient dependency. Hospital-induced mobility loss may be conceptualised as a problematic source of iatrogenic patient harm, worthy of attention from a patient safety standpoint. Preventative rehabilitation nursing interventions have the potential to prevent mobility loss. Design: Grounded theory study. Methods: Data were collected in three clinical settings: general rehabilitation, spinal injuries and stroke rehabilitation. Semi-structured interviews with 39 rehabilitation staff were completed. Results: Perceptions of hospital manual handling policy were described via four subcategories: policy as stimulus to improved practice; policy as divorced from reality; policy as threat; and policy as hindrance to rehabilitation. Conclusions: Hospital manual handling policy was perceived negatively by some nursing team members both as a threat and as a barrier to patients' rehabilitation. Risk aversion, divided teamwork practices and overuse of patient handling equipment were matters of concern. Relevance to clinical practice: Perceptions of hospital manual handling policy should be openly discussed by nursing managers and direct care providers. It is important to recognise that beliefs about and perceptions of policy will often impact later on staff practices and behaviours. Unintended consequences arising from dominant interpretations of manual handling policy must be acknowledged and risks identified. It is important that practitioners balance risk assessment and prevention of falls with patients' needs for mobilisation.

AB - Aims and objectives: To report the findings gained from interviews with hospital nurses and care assistants, regarding the impact of hospital manual handling policies on their role in maintaining and promoting patients' mobility. Background: Older hospitalised adults often experience deteriorations in mobility, which are often partially caused by protective or custodial care practice and environments that promote patient dependency. Hospital-induced mobility loss may be conceptualised as a problematic source of iatrogenic patient harm, worthy of attention from a patient safety standpoint. Preventative rehabilitation nursing interventions have the potential to prevent mobility loss. Design: Grounded theory study. Methods: Data were collected in three clinical settings: general rehabilitation, spinal injuries and stroke rehabilitation. Semi-structured interviews with 39 rehabilitation staff were completed. Results: Perceptions of hospital manual handling policy were described via four subcategories: policy as stimulus to improved practice; policy as divorced from reality; policy as threat; and policy as hindrance to rehabilitation. Conclusions: Hospital manual handling policy was perceived negatively by some nursing team members both as a threat and as a barrier to patients' rehabilitation. Risk aversion, divided teamwork practices and overuse of patient handling equipment were matters of concern. Relevance to clinical practice: Perceptions of hospital manual handling policy should be openly discussed by nursing managers and direct care providers. It is important to recognise that beliefs about and perceptions of policy will often impact later on staff practices and behaviours. Unintended consequences arising from dominant interpretations of manual handling policy must be acknowledged and risks identified. It is important that practitioners balance risk assessment and prevention of falls with patients' needs for mobilisation.

KW - care assistants

KW - hospital

KW - mobility

KW - nursing

KW - policy

KW - rehabilitation

KW - teamwork

U2 - 10.1111/jocn.12659

DO - 10.1111/jocn.12659

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 289

EP - 299

JO - Journal of Clinical Nursing

JF - Journal of Clinical Nursing

SN - 0962-1067

IS - 1-2

ER -