According to Hall, Ferguson-Pare, Pehter, White, Besner, Chisholm, Ferris, Fryers, Macleod, Mildon, Pedersen, and Hemingway (2012), 13,025 interruptions were observed in the presented study. 6,519 were on a medical unit and 6,506 were on a surgical units. The study found that the primary source of interruption came from other health care providers. Interruptions from nursing coworkers, the individual nurse, and physicians also occurred. Patients and their family members were found to cause the least interruptions. On medical units, interruptions by other health care workers occurred more than on the surgical unit. However, the surgical unit had more self interruptions than the medical unit. The results were also broken down into types of interruptions.
…show more content…
The study presented a table that was easy to read and understand. The authors also went into details to explain why the interruptions occurred and gave examples to the readers. By giving true examples, nurses are able to understand the result better and are able to apply them to their life.The study did have a clearly identifiable results section. A table was presented breaking down the statistical information by categories. The results also have a statistical significance due to the p value being 0. With a p value of 0, we can assume that none of the results happened by chance alone. The sample size included 13,025 nurses this supports the results statistical significance (Hall et al., 2012) This study used a mixed methods approach. The quantitative method broke down the information collected to see how it could be applied to other nursing events. Inferential results were identifiable by the study drawing a conclusion based on the information obtained from the sample. The qualitative method had themes that were identifiable. The themes included nurses and the interruptions. Throughout the results, nurses explained why the errors occurred. By the nurses expressing their feelings the results become were more clear (Rebar & Gersch,
The study presented a table that was easy to read and understand. The authors also went into details to explain why the interruptions occurred and gave examples to the readers. By giving true examples, nurses are able to understand the result better and are able to apply them to their life.The study did have a clearly identifiable results section. A table was presented breaking down the statistical information by categories. The results also have a statistical significance due to the p value being 0. With a p value of 0, we can assume that none of the results happened by chance alone. The sample size included 13,025 nurses this supports the results statistical significance (Hall et al., 2012) This study used a mixed methods approach. The quantitative method broke down the information collected to see how it could be applied to other nursing events. Inferential results were identifiable by the study drawing a conclusion based on the information obtained from the sample. The qualitative method had themes that were identifiable. The themes included nurses and the interruptions. Throughout the results, nurses explained why the errors occurred. By the nurses expressing their feelings the results become were more clear (Rebar & Gersch,