This study was done to investigate the causes of errors and omissions that occur in nursing their evaluation and care to patients. Previous studies have shown that nurses have been making errors in the delivery of health care through mistakes of documentation for intervention in patients.
In this study, a critique can be developed on the nature in which it was carried out and its findings. First, the study is too narrow in focus and yet seeks to solve such a diverse problem with nurses that can be attributed to several causal factors. The failure of nurses to arrive at their expectations and yet they have been trained and to withhold the nursing ethics can not just be investigated on the nurses alone but both internal and external factors that could lead to this failure. These error-producing conditions include too much pressure on work, unfamiliarity with the special task, lack of supervision, lack of experience, poor feedback mechanism, substandard care to patients, and inappropriate technology of monitoring patients (Reason 1982, p. 42).
The methodology here does not target samples for study from supervisors whose information and reaction as to why assessment of patients by nurses had been faulty can either support or disapprove the findings of the research.
Technology-wise, the study does not put in a question as to whether the technology utilized by the nurses is appropriate and familiar to them. Problems related to poor assessment and documentation of data may translate to poor knowledge of handling the machines (Reason 1982, p. 29). The methodology does not put a mechanism of uncovering such occurrences and yet they are too vital to the findings and recommendations of the study. Lack of appropriate knowledge on operating the machines that give data from the patients. Due to the upcoming technology, the methodology does not take the initiative to emphasize means of uncovering the level of knowledge by the nurses of operating these machines.
On the side of technology, the provision of devices to nurses of handling patients with cardiac chest problems and the level of protection could be critical in analyzing the poor documentation and assessment errors of patients (Reason 1982, p. 19). The article’s much concentration on the uncovering of the reasons for the failure of nurses in taking a standard assessment of chest-related patients could be due to the result of lack of secure protective devices as gloves, materials for protecting their respiratory system to avoid contracting such ailments. This could be the reason why they cannot do the accurate data collection from the specific patients.
The questionnaire as a data elicitation technique concentrated much on the patients with cardiac problems and their inefficiencies caused by nurses forgetting the need to compare their findings with those from other wards with different kinds of patients. This would be very important in actually coming to the adoption of a good solution to the problem. This is because by the aspect of being nurses and in accordance to its ethics nurses must assist all patients.
The methodology does not take into account other forms of data collection, in the assessment of the failure of nurses in handling effectively patients with chest problems. The application of the observation method could have given rise to proper findings and explanations as to the cause of this failure in the health sector (Reason 1982, p. 12). One-on-one interviews with both patients and the nurses could give personal emotions and opinions without being led by already structured questions which are too specific. The interview would have clarified why nurses did not feel it important to document data from patients with chest problems. Probably, they did think the data was crucial or was important for intervention.
In addition to this, a small sample was utilized in the study. It would have been a study that emphasized several wards with a variety of patients with the cardiac problem at different levels and in different levels of medication.
Taking a critical approach to the findings arrived at in the study, then, generalizations of the findings of the study on the failure of nurses alone could be impossible and only may serve as a tentative purpose therefore a clear and real conclusion for action may not be arrived at. In the analysis of human beings, it is normally hard to derive the truth just by relying on personal opinions in question form. Based on this, nurses may decide to give different causal attributes to their wrong assessment and documentation of data. It is very hard for them to expose their true causes of inefficiencies especially if they are negative depending on their expected roles like laziness.
Lastly, the study in its approach utilizes an individual approach in the analysis of the recorded inefficiencies of nurses. It would be appropriate to employ the systems approach which lays strategies of streamlining the whole organization by taking into the study all related organizational departments (Reason 1982, p. 30). This approach is vital in eliminating inefficiencies in organizations especially those related to a particular department of the organization.
Reference
Reason, J. 1982, Understanding Clerical Risk Management. Wiley, NY.