Approach to fever in children among final-year nursing students: a multicenter survey.
Children
Education
Evidence
Fever phobia
Inappropriate treatment
Physical methods
Journal
BMC nursing
ISSN: 1472-6955
Titre abrégé: BMC Nurs
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088683
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 Apr 2023
13 Apr 2023
Historique:
received:
10
11
2022
accepted:
22
03
2023
medline:
14
4
2023
entrez:
13
4
2023
pubmed:
14
4
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Unfounded concerns regarding fever are increasingly observed among nurses worldwide. However, no study has so far explored the preferred approach towards pediatric fever among nursing students. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the attitude towards pediatric fever among final-year nursing students. Between February and June 2022, final-year nursing students of 5 Italian university hospitals were asked to answer an online survey on their approach to fever in children. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were utilized. Multiple regression models were employed to explore the existence of moderators on fever conceptions. The survey was filled in by 121 nursing students (response rate 50%). Although most students (98%) do not consider discomfort to treat fever in children, only a minority would administer a second dose of the same antipyretic in nonresponsive cases (5.8%) or would alternate antipyretic drugs (13%). Most students would use physical methods to decrease fever (84%) and do not think that fever has mainly beneficial effects in children (72%). The own know-how adequacy on fever was inversely associated (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.13-0.81) with the beliefs that high fever might lead to brain damage. No further predictive variable was significantly associated with the concern that fever might be associated with brain damage, the advice of physical methods use, and the assumption that fever has mostly positive effects. This study shows for the first time that misconceptions and inappropriate attitudes towards fever in children are common among final-year nursing students. Nursing students could potentially be ideal candidates for improving fever management within clinical practice and amongst caregivers.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Unfounded concerns regarding fever are increasingly observed among nurses worldwide. However, no study has so far explored the preferred approach towards pediatric fever among nursing students. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the attitude towards pediatric fever among final-year nursing students.
METHODS
METHODS
Between February and June 2022, final-year nursing students of 5 Italian university hospitals were asked to answer an online survey on their approach to fever in children. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were utilized. Multiple regression models were employed to explore the existence of moderators on fever conceptions.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The survey was filled in by 121 nursing students (response rate 50%). Although most students (98%) do not consider discomfort to treat fever in children, only a minority would administer a second dose of the same antipyretic in nonresponsive cases (5.8%) or would alternate antipyretic drugs (13%). Most students would use physical methods to decrease fever (84%) and do not think that fever has mainly beneficial effects in children (72%). The own know-how adequacy on fever was inversely associated (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.13-0.81) with the beliefs that high fever might lead to brain damage. No further predictive variable was significantly associated with the concern that fever might be associated with brain damage, the advice of physical methods use, and the assumption that fever has mostly positive effects.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
This study shows for the first time that misconceptions and inappropriate attitudes towards fever in children are common among final-year nursing students. Nursing students could potentially be ideal candidates for improving fever management within clinical practice and amongst caregivers.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37055757
doi: 10.1186/s12912-023-01263-3
pii: 10.1186/s12912-023-01263-3
pmc: PMC10100172
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
119Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Nurse Educ Today. 2022 Sep;116:105449
pubmed: 35777294
J Child Health Care. 2013 Sep;17(3):305-16
pubmed: 23455871
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Aug 31;17(17):
pubmed: 32878256
Crit Care. 2016 Oct 3;20(1):303
pubmed: 27716372
Int J Nurs Stud. 2016 Apr;56:81-9
pubmed: 26643444
Pharm World Sci. 2005 Jun;27(3):254-7
pubmed: 16096897
BMJ Open. 2015 May 19;5(5):e007365
pubmed: 25991452
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2023 Jan;89(1):261-267
pubmed: 35982532
Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2014 Oct 16;9:26152
pubmed: 25326092
Nurs Health Sci. 2001 Sep;3(3):119-30
pubmed: 11882188
Nat Rev Immunol. 2015 Jun;15(6):335-49
pubmed: 25976513
Am J Dis Child. 1980 Feb;134(2):176-81
pubmed: 7352443
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2000 Feb;16(1):9-12
pubmed: 10698135
J Pediatr. 2017 Jan;180:177-183.e1
pubmed: 27810155
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Nov 26;18(23):
pubmed: 34886174
J Immunol. 2005 Mar 15;174(6):3676-85
pubmed: 15749906
Acta Paediatr. 2016 Jul;105(7):829-33
pubmed: 26998922
Acta Paediatr. 2019 Aug;108(8):1393-1397
pubmed: 30716166
Nurse Educ Today. 2021 Feb;97:104731
pubmed: 33385941
Int J Nurs Pract. 2003 Feb;9(1):S1-8
pubmed: 12588622
J Prof Nurs. 2020 Mar - Apr;36(2):13-19
pubmed: 32204854
Evol Med Public Health. 2020 Nov 23;9(1):26-35
pubmed: 33738101