Patient and Nursing Sensitive Indicators

In the 1800’s an effort to redefine nursing, by improving upon patient care, Florence Nightingale stands as the patron leader. She went onto grapple with the task of improving upon deplorable hospital conditions; while, measuring patient’s outcomes in a statistical method. Over a hundred years later, more recent compiled research related to a link between hospital staffing issues and adverse patient outcomes grabs the attention of internal and external healthcare populations. In the 90’s and early 2000’s new studies surface regarding the understaffed units, job dissatisfaction, and nursing burnouts; and, the correlation with the patients’ unforeseen negative outcomes. The general population fueled by the media (that followed the story closely) became fascinated with finding out the conclusion of the studies. As a result of the heightened attention the new practice of measuring indicators is born. In 1996 Maas Johnson and Moorhead went on to coin the phrase “nursing-sensitive-indicators.” This was a phrase that was meant to depict the elements that were important to derive positive patient outcomes. Needleman went on to point out that nursing sensitive indicators are a comprehensive term. He went on to add that research in this given area focuses on the interrelationship of inadequate nursing care and the in meshed relationship with negative outcomes. Examples of negative patient outcomes included: patient falls, nosocomial infections, and medication errors (to name a few). In contrast patient outcomes can be greatly improved if the quantity and quality of nursing care is provided (Nursing World, 2013). In this particular case the patient’s outcome could have been much better; given, the CNA and RN would have provided nursing care intertwined with the knowledge base of nursing sensitive indicators. In this case there were many measures that could have been taken to prevent harm to the patient; such as, repositioning the patient q2-3hrs with adequate pillow