Qualitative Research On Hourly Rounding

Hourly rounding is a systematic, proactive nurse-driven evidence-based intervention to anticipate and address needs in hospitalized patients (Meade, Bursell & Ketelsen, 2006). Research shows that hourly rounding or purposeful rounding seeks to increase the patient experience and patient satisfaction. According to Meade, Bursell & Ketelsen, effective hourly rounding can promote patient safety, foster team communication, and improve staff ability to provide efficient care. Despite, mounting research evidence demonstrating the benefits of hourly rounding it can be difficult to implement in the clinical setting.
Background and Purpose: A pilot study hourly rounding was initiated on a unit of a 981- bed multi-campus, regional health network. The
The interviews included nursing staff from both units, nursing leadership and those responsible for developing and implementing hourly rounds. The study team also reviewed material given to the front-line staff about the hourly rounding process. To further investigate the pitfalls that affected the change management there was more data collection needed. A methodology called ethnography was used , this allowed the study team to listen to staff, observe them and also get an idea about their perception of hourly rounding. Staff members were observed for 1 month from 2 to 3 hours at a time. The study team observed staff for 40 hours on each unit, all shift, even
In addition, Deitrick et al explained, there appeared to be a gap in understanding the benefits of hourly rounding between administrators and front-line staff on the study units, as well as a lack of clarity about how to implement hourly rounding into the patient care flow. Pitfalls: One pitfall that I think nursing leadership did not do well was stakeholder engagement and communication: They were communication from the top –down. They did not listen to those of the front –line when staff said they were not fully aware of their duties when it came to hourly rounding. In order for staff to really buy-in to a process, they have to feel like that have a say in the process. Staff would like to know their opinions matter. Staff should be involved in the entire process of the organizational change process. According to Anderson & Anderson, when people have a stake in the answer, they naturally have more commitment to getting it implemented successfully. Once leadership knew that staff was having a problem there should have been more up-ward communication. According to Gau, managers who are not interested or fail to promote intra-organizational communication upward or disseminate information downward will create procedural and organizational blockages.