Identifying the impact of audit and feedback on the professional role of the nurse and psychological well-being: An integrative systematic review.

This systematic review aimed to critically synthesis evidence to identify the impact that audit and feedback processes have on the professional role of the nurse and psychological well-being. Little is known about the extent to which audit and feedback processes can positively or negatively impact the professional role of the nurse and psychological well-being. An integrative systematic review was conducted. Covidence systematic review software was used to manage the screening process. Data extraction and methodological quality appraisal were conducted in parallel, and a narrative synthesis was conducted. Nurse participation and responsiveness to audit and feedback processes depended on self-perceived motivation, content, and delivery; and nurses viewed it as an opportunity for professional development. However, audit was reported to negatively impact nurses' psychological well-being, with impacts on burnout, stress, and demotivation in the workplace. Targeting framing, delivery, and content of audit and feedback is critical to nurses' satisfaction and successful quality improvement.

'It's all about ticks': A secondary qualitative analysis of nurse perspectives about documentation audit.

AIM: To understand how nurses talk about documentation audit in relation to their professional role. BACKGROUND: Nursing documentation in health services is often audited as an indicator of nursing care and patient outcomes. There are few studies exploring the nurses' perspectives on this common process. DESIGN: Secondary qualitative thematic analysis. METHODS: Qualitative focus groups (n = 94 nurses) were conducted in nine diverse clinical areas of an Australian metropolitan health service for a service evaluation focussed on comprehensive care planning in 2020. Secondary qualitative analysis of the large data set using reflexive thematic analysis focussed specifically on the nurse experience of audit, as there was the significant emphasis by participants and was outside the scope of the primary study. RESULTS: Nurses': (1) value quality improvement but need to feel involved in the cycle of change, (2) highlight that 'failed audit' does not equal failed care, (3) describe the tension between audited documentation being just bureaucratic and building constructive nursing workflows, (4) value building rapport (with nurses, patients) but this often contrasted with requirements (organizational, legal and audit) and additionally, (5) describe that the focus on completion of documentation for audit creates unintended and undesirable consequences. CONCLUSION: Documentation audit, while well-intended and historically useful, has unintended negative consequences on patients, nurses and workflows. IMPACT: Accreditation systems rely on care being auditable, but when individual legal, organizational and professional standards are implemented via documentation forms and systems, the nursing burden is impacted at the point of care for patients, and risks both incomplete cares for patients and incomplete documentation. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients participated in the primary study on comprehensive care assessment by nurses but did not make any comments about documentation audit.