Bedbugs and consultants are bleeding us dry
Automatic observation equipment can detract from nursing skills
Automated technology to monitor vital signs has emerged as a contested area in the drive to maintain standards of patient observation.
The vast majority - 85 per cent - of respondents to Nursing Times’ survey said it was used in their workplace.
But 42 per cent believe that reliance on this equipment can make nurses less likely to identify - or act on - signs of patient deterioration without it.
One respondent said: “They [nurses] rely on the results given by the machine rather than observing the patient. If a patient looks unwell but the observations are normal, where is that recorded or reported? It gets missed because the people doing the observations don’t have the skills to recognise a deteriorating patient.”
Medway Foundation Trust consultant critical care nurse Catherine Plowright said she would “happily bin” the machines. “Technology can detract from nursing staff putting their hands on patients. It’s also about understanding that if you read a number, [you have to know] what it means in reality.”
But NHS East of England deputy nurse director Sally Bassett told Nursing Times that the most effective observation used traditional techniques alongside technology.
“You need to know what the skin feels like,” she said. “The skill is how to use it alongside nurses’ intuitive, compassionate practice. It is about how you bring all that information together.”
Nursing Times survey suggests training in the use of technology must be improved - only 38 per cent of respondents said all staff on their ward who used automated technology had been trained to do so.
The RCN’s adviser in acute and emergency care Alan Dobson warned that employers could be held responsible if staff are using equipment they have not been trained in.
“When used appropriately, automated technology can be very accurate but nurses still need to use their professional judgement.”
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment.
Online training units, written and reviewed by experts. Earn two hours' CPD and a personalised certificate for your portfolio.
Subscribers get five FREE learning units and non-subscribers can access each learning unit for £10 + VAT.
Share
Readers' comments (2)
Anonymous | 14-Oct-2009 9:33 am
All measurements are taken using technology.
The mercury thermometer was advanced technology when invented by Daniel Fahrenheit in the 17th Century.
See http://en.wikipedia.or/wiki/Timeline_of_temperature_and_pressure_measurement_technology
originally this took TWENTY minutes to record the body temperature, until Thomas Allbut invented the clinical thermometer in 1866.
The Sphygmomanometer was leading edge technology when it was invented in 1881.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphygmomanometer.
See also
http://www.abdn.ac.uk/medical/bhs/booklet/equipmen.htm.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Martin Gray | 14-Oct-2009 1:01 pm
I'm a little confused by what is stated in this article and the posts on 'poor observation skills....' as they seem a trite contradictory.
My impression is that students DO receive training on the use of the technology available, either at their university or on placement, as there are no hospitals that use manual devices any longer. One post even highlights that students question the need to be taught how to manually take readings when there is no equipment available on placements.
Working in primary care I do have access to automated devices but prefer the manual sphygmomanometer as it has proven more accurate. Non of the GPs use automated to my knowledge as they also prefer the old fashioned way. Aural digital thermometers are far more accurate to the old style oral/axillary/rectal ones but the latest infra red devices are less so as there has to be an 'acclimatisation' period of the patient to their environment, otherwise the reading is likely to be lower than the true temperature.
As already commented all devices are due to the advancements of technology; we have to embrace that but still need to be able to revert to manual methods should the need ever arise. You can't take a generator or loads of batteries on an expedition for example.
Unsuitable or offensive?