IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v25y2016i9-10p1346-1355.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Intentional rounding: facilitators, benefits and barriers

Author

Listed:
  • Kelli Flowers
  • Kylie Wright
  • Rachel Langdon
  • Maureen McIlwrath
  • Craig Wainwright
  • Maree Johnson

Abstract

Aims and objectives To describe the implementation, practice and sustainability of Intentional Rounding (IR) within two diverse settings (aged care and maternity). Background The profile of patients in hospitals has changed over time, generally being more severe, placing heavy demands on nurses' time. Routine non‐urgent care is often provided only when there is time. IR has been found to increase both patient and staff satisfaction, also resulting in improved patient outcomes such as reduced falls and call bell use. IR is also used as a time management tool for safe and reliable provision of routine care. Methods This descriptive qualitative research study comprised of three focus groups in a metropolitan hospital. Results Fifteen nurses participated in three focus groups. Seven main themes emerged from the thematic analysis of the verbatim transcripts: implementation and maintenance, how IR works, roles and responsibilities, context and environment, benefits, barriers and legal issues. Conclusion IR was quickly incorporated into normal practice, with clinicians being able to describe the main concepts and practices. IR was seen as a management tool, facilitating accountability and continuity of management support being essential for sustainability. Clinicians reported increases in patient and staff satisfaction, and the opportunity to provide patient education. While patient type and acuity, ward layout and staff experience affected the practice of IR, the principles of IR are robust enough to allow for differences in the ward specialty and patient type. However, care must be taken when implementing IR to reduce the risk of alienating experienced staff. Incorporation of IR charts into the patient health care record is recommended. Relevance to clinical practice Engaging all staff, encouraging ownership and stability of management are key factors in the successful implementation and maintenance of IR. IR is flexible and robust enough to accommodate different patient types and acuity.

Suggested Citation

  • Kelli Flowers & Kylie Wright & Rachel Langdon & Maureen McIlwrath & Craig Wainwright & Maree Johnson, 2016. "Intentional rounding: facilitators, benefits and barriers," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(9-10), pages 1346-1355, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:25:y:2016:i:9-10:p:1346-1355
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13217
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13217
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.13217?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Leah East & Dianne Targett & Hamish Yeates & Elizabeth Ryan & Louisa Quiddington & Cindy Woods, 2020. "Nurse and patient satisfaction with intentional rounding in a rural Australian setting," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(7-8), pages 1365-1371, April.
    2. Angela Christiansen & Linda Coventry & Renée Graham & Elisabeth Jacob & Di Twigg & Lisa Whitehead, 2018. "Intentional rounding in acute adult healthcare settings: A systematic mixed‐method review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(9-10), pages 1759-1792, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:25:y:2016:i:9-10:p:1346-1355. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.