scholarly journals Neuroscience nursing interactive patient vignette

2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (14) ◽  
pp. 493
Author(s):  
Mark Stecker ◽  
Mona Stecker
Keyword(s):  
Neuroscience Nursing ◽  
Patient Vignette

The Design and Implementation of a Neuroscience Nursing Program

1992 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 359-361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jo-Anne Marr ◽  
Brenda Perkins-Meingast ◽  
Barbara Reid
Keyword(s):  
Nursing Program ◽  
Design And Implementation ◽  
Neuroscience Nursing

"Look Doctor, I'm a Carnivore"

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 5
Author(s):  
Themis Yiaslas
Keyword(s):  
Heart Disease ◽  
Dietary Preference ◽  
Patient Vignette

This patient vignette explores a Vietnam Veteran's effort to reverse atherosclerotic heart disease. In the process, he experiences the reversal of the dietary preference most central to his identity in three weeks.

Abstract WP412: Low Concordance Rates of Dysphagia Screening in Stroke Patients Evaluated by Neuroscience Nurses and Speech-Language Pathologists

Stroke ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Beth Durm ◽  
Julie Bonner ◽  
Ellen Meyer ◽  
Cyndy Brasher ◽  
Stuart Schleuse ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Oral Intake ◽  
Stroke Patients ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Nursing Assessment ◽  
Clinical Nurse Specialists ◽  
Speech Language Pathologist ◽  
Neuroscience Nursing ◽  
Water Test ◽  
High Concordance

Background: While there is recognition about the importance of dysphagia screens in stroke patients, there is limited data on the concordance rates of dysphagia screens performed by neuroscience-trained nurses and speech language pathologist (SLPs). Hypothesis: Neuroscience nurses and SLPs will have high concordance rates when assessing stroke patients with dysphagia screens. Methods: From March 1, 2016 through May 31, 2016 a random sample of stroke patients underwent a dysphagia screening by neuroscience nurses and subsequently by SLPs within 24 hours using the same tool, a 2-part screen assessing for contraindications and using the 3-ounse water swallow test. Results of the dysphagia screens were retrospectively collected to identify concordance rates. Results: During the study period, 98% of stroke patients underwent dysphagia screening prior to oral intake. Of 50 stroke patients evaluated by neuroscience nurses and SLPs, only 26 patients (52%) demonstrated concordance with pass or fail results. Of 33 patients who were administered the water test and passed the dysphagia screen based on the neuroscience nursing assessment, 20 patients (61%) were determined by SLPs evaluation to have dysphagia and 11 (33%) of these patients had had overt aspiration. Conclusions: Current metrics on dysphagia screening do not identify the efficacy of dysphagia screening among stroke patients. Stroke centers who utilize bedside nurses to perform initial dysphagia screens should evaluate concordance rates with SLPs. A multidisciplinary team including Clinical Nurse Specialists, SLPs, and Nursing IT specialists have implemented measures (hospital wide re-education of nursing staff and optimizing the electronic dysphagia screening form) to improve concordance rates among nurses and SLPs. A post-intervention follow-up study of concordance rates among neurosciences and SLPs is underway.

Consent conundrums: patient consent in neuroscience nursing

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-52
Author(s):  
John Finch
Keyword(s):  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Legal Problem ◽  
Neuroscience Nursing ◽  
Patient Consent ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
The Law ◽  
Mental Capacity Act ◽  
Pain Distress

In BJNN 15(4) and BJNN 15(5), John Finch looked in detail at the role of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and its accompanying Code in the practice of neuroscience nurses. He concluded, as have others, that the guidance offered by the Act and the Code falls short of what neuroscience nurses need in their practice. In this article, he turns his attention to the treatment of patients who can and do consent to proposed treatment. The law relating to such patients in this matter offers neither an act nor a code. The law is to be found in court decisions. It might, at first sight, appear that a practice situation in which a patient with undoubted mental capacity or, at least, sufficient mental capacity to understand and accept what is proposed, presents no legal problem. But a closer examination of mental processes encountered in patients who may be in pain, distress and pressing need reveals that communication between the treater and the treated may be subtle and complex, and that the meeting of minds required in law to ensure that a patient has genuinely agreed to a detailed proposal is anything but simple.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document