Objective: The objective of this review was to examine the characteristics and processes of clinical reasoning used by registered nurses in clinical practice, and to identify factors reported to relate to the use of clinical reasoning by registered nurses in clinical practice. Introduction: Significant variability in the clinical reasoning of graduate registered nurses has been identified in research, with underdeveloped and unsafe clinical reasoning being linked to failure-to-rescue and sentinel events in the clinical setting. The identification of characteristics and processes of clinical reasoning, and factors relating to registered nurses’ clinical reasoning when engaged in clinical practice, will increase understanding of the clinical reasoning requirements for undergraduate registered nurses and of potential factors that may affect their clinical reasoning. Inclusion criteria: Studies including registered nurses who met the criteria for registered nurse registration in Australia and who used clinical reasoning to engage with health care consumers in all practice environments were eligible for inclusion. Methods: Eight databases were searched, with articles identified through CINAHL, MedNar, PubMed, Science Direct, ERIC, PsycINFO, Scopus, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. Database searches were conducted on December 31, 2020, and updated August 20, 2021, with primary qualitative and quantitative research studies in English from 2000 onwards considered for inclusion. Opinion papers, text, and reports were not included. Data were extracted based on the draft charting tool from the scoping review protocol, with results presented in tabular format and in a narrative summary. Results: The 29 qualitative and 5 quantitative research studies included in the scoping review utilized exploratory descriptive, descriptive rationalist, narrative, ethnography, correlational, observational, and grounded theory methodologies in their research designs. Observation, think-aloud sessions, questionnaires, surveys, interviews, and focus groups were used to collect data from the 1099 participants in 9 countries. Multiple concepts related to the characteristics (n=35) and processes (n=30) of clinical reasoning were detected in the research studies, with 5 categories identified: i) situation management, ii) data management, iii) interpreting, iv) implementing and evaluating, and v) professional practice, with an additional processes category identified (decision-making processes). The factors (n=26) reported to relate to clinical reasoning were categorized into environment of care, care requirements, professional practice, experience, knowledge, and decision-making processes. Connections between the various concepts were evident throughout the review. Conclusions: The scoping review identified characteristics and processes of clinical reasoning, as well as factors reported to relate to clinical reasoning in all studies. The concepts that comprise the clinical reasoning of registered nurses in clinical practice must be considered in undergraduate registered nurse education. Registered nurses must complete their baccalaureate program with well-developed clinical reasoning to ensure safe clinical practice. Understanding the characteristics and processes of registered nurses’ clinical reasoning in clinical practice, and the factors reported to relate to clinical reasoning, supports the creation of targeted resources for development and assessment of clinical reasoning.

There is limited research available on safe medication management practices in emergency medical services (EMS) practice, with most evidence-based medication safety guidelines based on research in ...

Review question/objective: : The objectives of the scoping review are to: 1. Examine the characteristics and processes of clinical reasoning as used by registered nurses in clinical practice. 2. Identify factors reported to relate to clinical reasoning use by registered nurses in clinical practice.

Purpose: Acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have a significant and prolonged impact on health-related quality of life, patient outcomes, and escalation of pulmonary function decline. COPD-X guidelines published in 2003 subsist to facilitate a shift from the emphasis on pharmacological treatment to a more holistic multi-disciplinary interventions approach. Despite the existing comprehensive recommendations, readmission rates have increased in the last decade. Evidence to date has reported sub-optimal COPD guidelines adherence in emergency departments. This qualitative study explored contributing factors to interdisciplinary staff non-adherence and utilisation of COPD-X guidelines in a major Southern Queensland Emergency Department. Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews with interdisciplinary staff were conducted in an emergency department. A purposive sample of doctors, nurses, physiotherapists, pharmacist and a social worker were recruited. Interviews were digitally recorded, de-identified and transcribed verbatim. Data analysis followed a coding process against the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to examine implementation barriers and potential solutions. Identified factors affecting non-adherence and underutilisation of guidelines were then mapped to the capability, opportunity, motivation, behaviour model (COM-B) and behaviour change wheel (BCW) to inform future implementation recommendations. Results: Prominent barriers influencing the clinical uptake of COPD guidelines were identified using TDF analysis and included knowledge, professional role clarity, clinical behaviour regulation, memory, attention, and decision process, beliefs about departmental capabilities, environmental context and resources. Potential interventions included education, training, staffing, funding and time-efficient digitalised referrals and systems management reminders to prevent COPD readmissions, remissions and improve patient health-related quality of life. Conclusion: Implementation strategies such as electronic interdisciplinary COPD proforma that facilitates a multimodal approach with appropriate patient/staff resources and referrals prior to discharge from an ED require further exploration. Greater clarity around which components of the COPD X guidelines must be applied in ED settings needs to stem from future research.