Hourly Rounding In Nursing

Change is inevitable not only in the hospital setting but also in all other organizations that put the safety of stakeholders at hand. It is, however, sometimes challenging to have all stakeholders adopting a proposed change since some individuals would rather stick to the old ways of doing things as opposed to trying out new interventions (Guse, Peterson, Christiansen, Mahoney, Laud, & Layde,, 2015). Nevertheless, positive change is essential, especially when such a change is expected to positively impact on the safety of patients (Johnson, Veneziano, Green, Howarth, Malast, Mastro, Moran, Mulligan, & Smith, 2011). The purpose of this paper is to critique the adoption of hourly rounding as a nursing intervention for preventing falls.

During the extended hospital stay, the cost of treatment also increases, sometimes by about 61 percent of the normal charges for treatment (Guse et al., 2015). Evidence based practice has shown evidence that hourly rounding can decrease the general hospital stay significant while at the same time cutting down the cost of treatment through reduction of falls. Nurses against this change complain of increased commitment on other duties, making it difficult for them to attend to their patients within the hour (Marquis & Huston, 2015). It should, however, be understood that hourly rounding may never be successful without teamwork. The absence of one nurse during the hourly rounding should be substituted by another nurse without regular complaints about personal patients. The effectiveness of hourly rounding has been clearly outlined by various evidence based materials and nursing literature, guaranteeing its adoptability (Fagan, 2012). All the same, it is most for the healthcare organization to found out ways of making hourly rounding a policy, in order to help nurses internalize the strategy as part of normal caring