Conectar
This study aimed to explore nurses' experiences with the Braden Scale, assess their readiness for artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, and understand the innovations they envision for clinical practice.
Explanatory sequential mixed design.
The study included 118 nurses in the quantitative data and 42 in focus groups. Quantitative data were collected using the MAIRS-MS. Qualitative data were analysed using phenomenological approaches and MAXQDA.
The average age was 33.38 ± 7.42 years and 88.1% were women. The average length of professional experience is 11.66 ± 8.22 years. The average time to administer the Braden Scale was 5.02 ± 4.36 min. While 55.1% of the participants found the Braden Scale inadequate, 55.9% stated that a more comprehensive risk assessment scale was needed and the MAIRS-MS score was 78.48 ± 16.66. The sub-themes were identified: Simple and quick applicability, early risk identification, validity and reliability issues, neglecting other risk factors, making it more comprehensive and specific, developing of a new risk assessment scale, technological improvements, patient data treasure chest, creating avatars and converting speech-to-text.
This study highlights critical gaps in the Braden Scale's effectiveness. Nurses identified significant shortcomings, including non-specificity and the neglect of key risk factors, which undermine its utility in clinical settings. They emphasised that stronger risk predictions and personalised care plans can be achieved by AI technology.
This study emphasises the need to revise the Braden Scale or develop a new one due to its limitations in risk assessment, providing crucial information to improve patient care and offering new perspectives on AI integration in PI risk assessment for nursing practice.
This study highlights nurses' experiences and suggestions for improving the Braden Scale in clinical practice, emphasising their expectations for AI technology and its potential to revolutionise patient care.
The study report was prepared following the Good Reporting of A Mixed Methods Study (GRAMMS) checklist.
No patient or public contribution.
FreshRSS 