Key result
An educational intervention and new monitoring tools significantly improved the process of identifying and managing cardiovascular disease risk factors in seriously mentally ill patients (p < .001).
Why the study?
Does an educational intervention and new monitoring tools improve cardiovascular disease screening processes in seriously mentally ill patients?
Does an educational intervention and new monitoring tools improve cardiovascular disease screening processes in seriously mentally ill patients?
p-value: p=< .001
Implementation of educational interventions and monitoring tools by advanced practice registered nurses significantly improves cardiovascular disease screening processes for seriously mentally ill patients.
May support nurse-led educational interventions for CVD screening in SMI patients; leaves open confirmation in randomized trials.
PURPOSE: Increased mortality among the seriously mentally ill is largely due to cardiovascular disease (CVD). This applied research project examined a process of CVD screening at a community mental health center, then implemented and evaluated an improved process of identifying and managing CVD risk factors. DESIGN AND METHODS: Patient records (n = 130) were reviewed at baseline and 6 months posteducational intervention and implementation of new monitoring tools. FINDINGS: Statistical analysis showed significant process improvement (p < .001). PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Advanced practice registered nurses can design and implement improved CVD screening to mitigate morbidity and mortality in the seriously mentally ill.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Maki et al. (2012) studied Serious mental illness (n=130). Educational intervention and new monitoring tools for CVD screening vs. Baseline was evaluated on Process improvement in identifying and managing CVD risk factors (p=< .001). An educational intervention and new monitoring tools significantly improved the process of identifying and managing cardiovascular disease risk factors in seriously mentally ill patients (p < .001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: