Patient advocacy actions by intensivist nurses

A quantitative, descriptive-exploratory, cross-sectional study. The questionnaire was answered by nurses who worked in Intensive Care Units in the South and Southeast regions of Brazil. A factorial exploratory analysis of the data, T-tests and the chi-square test were used for association between factors.

Results

451 nurses participated in the study. A greater number of nurses disagreed with the negative consequences that patient advocacy may have or bring to them. Greater dialogue among nursing staff would enhance teamwork results. Nurses with two or more job relationships need more physical and mental effort, which compromises their quality of life and work, leading to them being those who least practice patient advocacy.

Conclusion

Nurses understand patient advocacy as an important part of their work, as well as factors which may influence their decision to defend their patients, but are still unaware of the benefits of advocacy.

Patient Advocacy; Critical Care Nursing; Intensive Care Units; Ethics, Nursing

Variables
Gender	Female	380 (84.3%)^#
	Male	71 (15.7%)^#
Age		34.72 (7.84)*
State	São Paulo	140 (31%)^#
	Rio de Janeiro	84 (18.6%)^#
	Rio Grande do Sul	69 (15.3%)^#
	Minas Gerais	62 (13.7%)^#
	Paraná	56 (12.4%)^#
	Santa Catarina	28 (6.2%)^#
	Espírito Santo	12 (2.7%)^#
Has specialization	Yes	302 (67%)^#
	No	149 (33%)^#
Type of specialization (n=302)	Intensivist	255 (56.5%)^#
	ICU Training	68 (15.1%)^#
	Master’s degree	23 (5.1%)^#
	Doctorate degree	10 (2.2%)^#
Employment relationships	1 relationship	322 (71.4%)^#
	+ 1 relationship	120 (26.6%)^#
Working hours/week	Up to 30 hours	135(29.9%)^#
	+ 30 hours	305 (67.6%)^#

Factor 1: Background, barriers and negative implications of advocacy
		1		2		X²	P
		AF	RF	AF	RF	X²	P
Gender	Female	233	61.8	147	38.3	0.003	0.954
	Male	39	60.9	25	39.1
State	RS	43	62.3	26	37.7	1.779	0.939
	SC	17	60.7	11	39.3
	PR	34	60.7	22	39.3
	SP	91	65.0	49	35.0
	RJ	49	58.3	35	41.7
	ES	3	60.0	2	40.0
	MG	35	56.5	27	43.5
Courses	None	25	59.5	17	40.5	0.871	0.929
	Training	40	58.8	28	41.2
	Specialization	189	62.6	113	37.4
	Master’s degree	12	54.5	10	45.5
	Doctorate degree	6	60.0	4	40.0
Intensivist	Yes	163	63.9	92	36.1	4.076	0.130
	No	98	56.6	75	43.4
Employment relationship	Public	134	62.6	80	37.4	1.916	0.590
	Private	99	60.4	65	39.6
	Mixed	30	55.6	24	44.4
Type of relationship	Effective	230	62.0	141	38.0	0.433	0.805
Type of relationship	Temporary	28	57.1	21	42.9
Care (complexity)	Low	8	72.7	3	27.3	2.404	0.493
	Medium	64	57.1	48	42.9
	High	177	61.1	111	38.5
Ethics committee	Yes	181	62.0	111	38.0	1.338	0.720
	No	52	57.1	39	42.9
	Does not know	27	61.4	17	38.6
ICU meetings	Yes	217	66.2	111	33.8	19.201	<0.001*
ICU meetings	No	44	43.1	58	56.9		<0.001*
Number of employment relationships	(1)	212	65.8	110	34.2	10.244	<0.001*
Number of employment relationships	(2)	59	49.2	61	50.8		<0.001*
Weekly working hours	(1)	75	55.6	60	44.4	2.771	0.096
Weekly working hours	(2)	195	63.9	110	36.1
Number of beds	(1)	220	60.3	145	39.7	0.806	0.369
Number of beds	(2)	50	65.8	26	34.2

Universidade de São Paulo, Escola de Enfermagem Av. Dr. Enéas de Carvalho Aguiar, 419 , 05403-000 São Paulo - SP/ Brasil, Tel./Fax: (55 11) 3061-7553, - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: reeusp@usp.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Corresponding author: Caroline Porcelis Vargas Rua Ruth Pereira, 806, Ingleses do Rio Vermelho CEP 88058-640 – Florianópolis, SC, Brazil k2vargas@gmail.com

Brasil

Brasil

Patient advocacy actions by intensivist nurses * * Extracted from the dissertation: “Exercício da advocacia do paciente por enfermeiros de Unidades de Terapia Intensiva”, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Enfermagem, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, 2017.

ABSTRACT

Objective

Method

Results

Conclusion

Patient advocacy actions by intensivist nurses ^* * Extracted from the dissertation: “Exercício da advocacia do paciente por enfermeiros de Unidades de Terapia Intensiva”, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Enfermagem, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, 2017.