A comparative evaluation of three point-of-care tools by registered nurses

Author:

Nickum AnnieORCID,Raszewski RebeccaORCID,Vonderheid Susan C.ORCID

Abstract

Objective: This study compared three point-of-care tools (PoCTs) to determine which PoCT was rated highest based on key features and characteristics by registered nurses. Methods: The PoCTs reviewed were Nursing Reference Center Plus, ClinicalKey for Nursing, and UpToDate. Nurses were asked to use each PoCT to answer three clinical questions and then rate their experience based on the following areas: currency, relevancy, layout, navigation, labeling, and use of filters. They were also asked to indicate their familiarity with each PoCT, their overall opinions, and demographic information. Results: Seventy-six nurses completed the entire survey. Ratings of PoCTs did not differ by participant characteristics. Participants were most familiar with UpToDate, and average ratings were similar across all three PoCTs. Answers to open-ended questions suggested that nurses’ experiences searching and locating relevant information to address clinical questions varied and that brand recognition might have impacted preference. Discussion: None of the PoCTs was significantly preferred over the others, nor received high ratings, which suggests that organizations need to survey their nurses to determine which PoCT is preferred by their staff. Findings also suggest that institutional priorities can guide the decision whether a library should license multiple PoCTs, nursing, and/or non-nursing specific PoCTs. Research is needed to understand how PoCTs could better meet the information needs of registered nurses. Librarians should learn more about what types of information nurses are seeking and explore opportunities to educate nurses on how to better utilize PoCTs for their practice.

Publisher

University Library System, University of Pittsburgh

Subject

Library and Information Sciences,Health Informatics

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3