Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

M Maylor

Publications and source records attributed to M Maylor.

9 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

Debating the relative unimportance of pressure-reducing equipment.

This article examines some assumptions underlying the provision of pressure-reducing equipment, and argues that failure to 'act first and ask questions later' may be a key source of pressure damage. Indeed, it is argued that prevention of pressure damage can be simplified by identifying three groups of patients: those who have pressure ulcers; those who will develop them in faction is not taken; and those who will not get them. The linkage of risk assessment scores and guidelines is challenge as erroneous and misleading.

Beds↗
PubMed1999

Pressure sore survey: Part One.

Prevalence and equipment surveys were performed annually in the first of a three-part survey investigating the prevalence of pressure sores in an NHS trust, and the effect of staff knowledge and attitudes. The study was undertaken in an integrated trust with acute and community services. The surveys investigated prevalence of pressure sores and availability of equipment, and identified characteristics of the patient population for comparison with other studies. The results of the equipment survey indicated that there is enough suitable pressure-reducing apparatus to treat those patients with existing severe and superficial sores and more than enough to provide preventive assistance to patients at medium and low risk. The results over the five year period studied suggest that the introduction of pressure sore incidence monitoring is helpful in focusing attention on the pressure sore problem.

Beds↗
PubMed1999

Pressure sore survey. Part 2: Nurses' knowledge.

This is the second of a three-part article which investigates the prevalence of pressure sores and nurses' knowledge and attitudes in one NHS trust. This study was designed to explore the assumption that lack of knowledge might be a contributory factor to pressure sore formation. A cross-section of trained and untrained staff over several areas of work in the acute and community settings were represented. Overall, the differences in awareness and opinions among staff were not indicative of major deficits in knowledge that could account for failure to prevent pressure sores. It is suggested that the problem may well be one of individual or organisational motivation.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

Pressure sore survey. Part 3: Locus of control.

This is the third in a three-part article which investigates the prevalence, knowledge and attitudes to pressure sores in one NHS trust. This study describes the methodology used in choosing and developing attitude scales to explore whether there are any relationships between the locus of control and pressure sore prevention. Factors to do with attitude and the value associated with pressure sore prevention have a central role. Attitudes and beliefs affect what we do and may contribute to pressure sore development.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed1999

A comparison of three risk assessment scales.

Nurses often use pressure sore risk assessment tools without clearly understanding their underlying principles. Comparing different tools can help to determine which are of most value to nurses. Assessment tools can aid decision-making and give objective credibility to practice.

Humans↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Nurse practitioners: what difference does a title make?

In this article, the author reflects on the nature of specialist and advanced nursing practice. He argues that the essence of nursing lies not in names and title but in the way individuals approach daily practice.

Humans↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Senior nurses' control expectations and the development of pressure ulcers.

AIM: The aim of this research was to establish whether the attitudes and expectations of senior nursing staff might adversely affect patient outcomes in the prevention of pressure ulcers. The hypothesis was that nursing locus of control affects clinical outcomes in patients. In particular, it affects departmental prevalence of pressure damage. METHOD: A population of nurses (n = 439) in an acute and community NHS trust were surveyed to test knowledge, control beliefs and value of pressure ulcer prevention relative to prevalence. The research was designed to provide different data against which to test the hypothesis: first, to assess acceptability of nurses' knowledge of prevention and appropriate use of risk assessment and equipment; second, to calculate a mean departmental pressure ulcer prevalence; and third, to measure locus of control and value, which is the focus of this article. RESULTS: There were strong associations between departmental prevalence of pressure ulcers and attitudes of senior nursing staff. For example, the more that ward sisters believed they could control pressure ulcer prevention, the higher the prevalence of ulcers in their department. The more that sisters believed that they could not control prevalence, the lower the prevalence of ulcers. CONCLUSION: The study shows that failure to account for beliefs, values and expectations of staff could lead to patient harm. It is suggested that it might be counterproductive to put great effort into developing clinical guidelines and refinement of risk assessment methods. The findings have important implications for nursing, and challenge the assumption that nurse leaders are universally beneficial to patients.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗