ABSTRACT
Purpose@#This descriptive study aimed to identify the effects of purposeful and timely nursing rounds on patients' perception of the quality of nursing services and nurses' perception of nursing rounds. @*Methods@#Intentional nursing rounds were conducted by communicating patients’ questions on pain, position, pump, potty, and possessions. A total of 144 nurses and 149 patients participated, and data were collected using self-report questionnaires. The independent t-test, x 2 test, and Wilcoxon’s rank-sum test were used to analyze the data with SPSS version 24.0. @*Results@#Although intentional nursing rounds improved the nurses’ perception of nursing rounds, there was no significant difference. The nurses’ benefit had the lowest score (3.36), and the benefit of communication with patients had the highest score (3.79).Intentional nursing rounds significantly improved the patients’ perception of the quality of nursing services in the intervention group. Among the factors of empathy (Z=4.98, p<.001) related to the quality of nursing services as perceived by the patient, assurance (Z=5.50, p<.001), reliability (Z=4.43, p<.001), and responsiveness (Z=5.02, p<.001) significantly increased. @*Conclusion@#Intentional nursing rounds positively affected patients’ perception of the quality of nursing service. It is important to improve intentional nursing rounds to enhance nurses’ perceptions of them.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: This study estimated the annual socioeconomic costs of food-borne disease in 2008 from a societal perspective and using a cost-of-illness method. METHODS: Our model employed a comprehensive set of diagnostic disease codes to define food-borne diseases with using the Korea National Health Insurance (KNHI) reimbursement data. This study classified the food borne illness as three types of symptoms according to the severity of the illness: mild, moderate, severe. In addition to the traditional method of assessing the cost-of-illness, the study included measures to account for the lost quality of life. We estimated the cost of the lost quality of life using quality-adjusted life years and a visual analog scale. The direct cost included medical and medication costs, and the non-medical costs included transportation costs, caregiver's cost and administration costs. The lost productivity costs included lost workdays due to illness and lost earnings due to premature death. RESULTS: The study found the estimated annual socioeconomic costs of food-borne disease in 2008 were 954.9 billion won (735.3 billion won-996.9 billion won). The medical cost was 73.4 - 76.8% of the cost, the lost productivity cost was 22.6% and the cost of the lost quality of life was 26.0%. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the cost-of-illness studies are known to have underestimated the actual socioeconomic costs of the subjects, and these studies excluded many important social costs, such as the value of pain, suffering and functional disability. The study addressed the uncertainty related to estimating the socioeconomic costs of food-borne disease as well as the updated cost estimates. Our estimates could contribute to develop and evaluate policies for food-borne disease.