{
"id": "https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1100618",
"doi": "10.5281/ZENODO.1100618",
"url": "https://zenodo.org/record/1100618",
"types": {
"ris": "JOUR",
"bibtex": "article",
"citeproc": "article-journal",
"schemaOrg": "ScholarlyArticle",
"resourceType": "Journal article",
"resourceTypeGeneral": "Text"
},
"creators": [
{
"name": "Cherryl Lowe",
"affiliation": []
}
],
"titles": [
{
"title": "Validation Of An Acuity Measurement Tool For Maternity Services"
}
],
"publisher": {
"name": "Zenodo"
},
"container": {},
"subjects": [
{
"subject": "Maternity"
},
{
"subject": "acuity"
},
{
"subject": "midwifery research"
},
{
"subject": "midwifery workloads."
}
],
"contributors": [],
"dates": [
{
"date": "2015-04-03",
"dateType": "Issued"
}
],
"publicationYear": 2015,
"language": "en",
"identifiers": [
{
"identifier": "https://zenodo.org/record/1100619",
"identifierType": "URL"
}
],
"sizes": [],
"formats": [],
"rightsList": [
{
"rights": "Creative Commons Attribution 4.0",
"rightsUri": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0"
},
{
"rights": "Open Access",
"rightsUri": "info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess"
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"description": "Background - The TrendCare Patient Dependency
\nSystem is currently used by a large number of maternity Services
\nacross Australia, New Zealand and Singapore. In 2012, 2013 and
\n2014 validation studies were initiated in all three countries to validate
\nthe acuity tools used for women in labour, and postnatal mothers and
\nbabies. This paper will present the findings of the validation study.
\nAim - The aim of this study was to; identify if the care hours
\nprovided by the TrendCare acuity system was an accurate reflection
\nof the care required by women and babies; obtain evidence of
\nchanges required to acuity indicators and/or category timings to
\nensure the TrendCare acuity system remains reliable and valid across
\na range of maternity care models in three countries.
\nMethod - A non-experimental action research methodology was
\nused across maternity services in four District Health Boards in New
\nZealand, a large tertiary and a large secondary maternity service in
\nSingapore and a large public maternity service in Australia.
\nStandardised data collection forms and timing devices were used to
\ncollect midwife contact times, with women and babies included in the
\nstudy. Rejection processes excluded samples when care was not
\ncompleted/rationed, and contact timing forms were incomplete. The
\nvariances between actual timed midwife/mother/baby contact and the
\nTrendCare acuity category times were identified and investigated.
\nResults - Thirty two (88.9%) of the 36 TrendCare acuity category
\ntimings, fell within the variance tolerance levels when compared to
\nthe actual timings recorded for midwifery care. Four (11.1%)
\nTrendCare categories provided less minutes of care than the actual
\ntimings and exceeded the variance tolerance level. These were all
\nnight shift category timings. Nine postnatal categories were not able
\nto be compared as the sample size for these categories was
\nstatistically insignificant. 100% of labour ward TrendCare categories
\nmatched actual timings for midwifery care, all falling within the
\nvariance tolerance levels.
\nThe actual time provided by core midwifery staff to assist lead
\nmaternity carer (LMC) midwives in New Zealand labour wards
\nshowed a significant deviation to previous studies. The findings of
\nthe study demonstrated the need for additional time allocations in
\nTrendCare to accommodate an increased level of assistance given to
\nLMC midwives.
\nConclusion - The results demonstrated the importance of regularly
\nvalidating the TrendCare category timings with actual timings of the
\ncare hours provided. It was evident from the findings that variances
\nto models of care and length of stay in maternity units have increased
\nmidwifery workloads on the night shift. The level of assistance
\nprovided by the core labour ward staff to the LMC midwife has
\nincreased substantially.
\nOutcomes - As a consequence of this study, changes were made to
\nthe night duty TrendCare maternity categories, additional acuity
\nindicators were developed and times for assisting LMC midwives in
\nlabour ward increased. The updated TrendCare version was delivered
\nto maternity services in 2014.",
"descriptionType": "Abstract"
},
{
"description": "{\"references\": [\"M.A. Blegen, C.J. Goode, I. Reed, \\\"Nursing Staffing and Patient\\nOutcomes\\\", Journal of Nursing Research, Vol. 4, No. 7, pp 43-50, 1998.\", \"K.M. Parrinello, \\\"Accounting for Patient Acuity in an Ambulatory\\nSurgery Centre\\\", Journal of Nursing Economics, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp 167-\\n172, 1987.\", \"K. Harper, C. McCully, \\\"Acuity Systems Dialogue and Patient\\nClassification System Essentials\\\", Journal of Nursing Administration,\\nVol. 31, No. 4, pp 248-299, 2007.\", \"V. Plummer, \\\"An Analysis of Patient Dependency Data Utilizing the\\nTrendCare System,\\\" Doctoral thesis, Monash University, Melbourne,\\nAustralia 2005.\", \"E.J.S. Hovenga, \\\"Development of the Patient Assessment and\\nInformation System (PAIS), Doctoral thesis, University of New South\\nWales, 1994.\", \"J.D. Thompson, \\\"The Measurement of Nursing Intensity\\\", Health Care\\nFinancing Review, Nov. Annual Supplement No. 6 pp 47-55, 1984.\", \"A.R. Gault, \\\"The Aberdeen Formula as an Illustration of the Difficulty\\nof Determining Nursing Requirements\\\", International Journal of Nursing\\nStudies, Vol. 19, pp 61-77, 1982.\"]}",
"descriptionType": "Other"
}
],
"geoLocations": [],
"fundingReferences": [],
"relatedIdentifiers": [
{
"relationType": "HasVersion",
"relatedIdentifier": "10.5281/zenodo.1100619",
"relatedIdentifierType": "DOI"
}
],
"schemaVersion": "http://datacite.org/schema/kernel-4",
"providerId": "cern",
"clientId": "cern.zenodo",
"agency": "datacite",
"state": "findable"
}