Design: A focussed ethnography allowed for the investigation of registered nurses' clinical practices in two wards in a Danish University Hospital. The study adhered to the 'Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research'.
Methods: Participant observation and ethnographic interviews were conducted from March 2019 to August 2019. Ten registered nurses were observed and interviewed, and four physicians were interviewed. Data were analysed using LeCompte and Schensul's ethnographic analysis.
Findings: The findings show the registered nurses' ambivalence towards the early warning score as a decision support system. Early warning score monitoring created a space for registered nurses to identify and initiate optimized care. However, when early warning scores contradicted registered nurses' clinical judgments, the latter were given priority in decisions even though elevated scores were not always accounted for in the situation. Moreover, we found unspoken expectations in the collaboration between physicians and registered nurses, which influenced the registered nurses' workloads and decisions regarding early warning scores.
Conclusion: Registered nurses' clinical judgment is essential to clinical decisions on the care and safety of patients if used combined with the early warning score. Interprofessional collaboration between registered nurses and physicians about the early warning score is challenged. Future research may address this challenge to explore how it should be operated as a collaboration tool.
Impact: The study adds knowledge to the evidence base of registered nurses' use of early warning score and the advantages and challenges associated with the use of these scoring systems. The study may provide valuable knowledge for the future development of policies or implementation strategies.
Artiklen er publiceret i Journal of Advance Nursing 2021 og er publiceret af: Rikke Mølgaard, Lone Jørgensen, Erika F. Christensen, Mette Grønkjær & Siri Lygum Voldbjerg.