Intentional rounding in hospital wards

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Intentional rounding in hospital wards: What works, for whom and in what circumstances?

  • IRAS ID

    148725

  • Contact name

    Ruth Harris

  • Contact email

    Ruth.Harris@kcl.ac.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    Kingston University and St George's, University of London

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    2 years, 6 months, 0 days

  • Research summary

    Intentional rounding (IR) is the structured process whereby nurses in hospitals carry out regular checks, usually hourly, with patients using a standardised protocol to address issues of positioning, pain, personal needs and placement of items. The Chief Nursing Officer and Lead Public Health Nurse's Compassion in Practice action plan was to support all wards to have implemented IR by the end of 2013. However, little is known about how many NHS trusts have implemented IR, whether there is consistency in its implementation and whether there are any unintended consequences of IR. This two and a half year study uses a multi-method approach to find out what works in IR, for whom and in what circumstances, with a particular focus on how best to develop and implement IR to improve the quality and appropriateness of patient care. The study uses multiple methods over four phases. Phase 1 involves theory development to generate hypotheses for the study. Phase 2 involves a national survey of all non-specialist NHS acute trusts in England to explore how IR is implemented and supported. Phase 3 selects six case study wards (acute and care of the elderly) across three geographically spread hospitals in England and on each ward involves: interviews with up to 11 staff (e.g. managers, nurses, doctors) and 10 patients and family members; observations of IR and nurse shadowing; analysis of routinely collected ward outcome data (from the NHS Safety Thermometer); and an analysis of the costs of IR. Phase 4 involves data analysis across all phases to develop an evaluation of what aspects of IR work, for whom and in what circumstances. The findings of this study will enable trusts to implement IR well, ensuring staff understand what it is and how to apply it appropriately within their setting and for different patient groups.

  • REC name

    London - Surrey Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    14/LO/1977

  • Date of REC Opinion

    17 Nov 2014

  • REC opinion

    Favourable Opinion