A review of the sterile processing department's reprocessing of surgical instruments.

A surgical department within a university hospital represents a complex, multiprofessional care environment that demands collaboration between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients to achieve high‐quality and safe care. There is a significant risk that prioritising efficiency may adversely affect patient safety. Research and professional nursing codes underscore the importance of adopting a more person‐centred approach (American Nurses Credentialing Center ; McCormack et al. ; McCance and McCormack ). The rapid pace of work and the high volume of surgical patients in inpatient care can result in unlicensed professional groups assuming tasks typically performed by licensed nursing professionals, potentially exposing the organisation to unnecessary challenges and leading to low precision in surgical nursing care. Pre‐ and post‐surgical care is predominantly focused on organ surveillance from a strictly medical perspective. The patient is therefore reduced to representing only objective disease data (disease‐oriented care), rather than an open system that enables them to be a person with an illness, able to tell their story and collaborate with professionals on care, treatment and rehabilitation plans, that is, person‐centred care (Ekman ). Surgical care is grounded in physiology and personalised medicine of the diseased organ or body. The therapies employed are based on genetic aspects or each patient's molecular, cellular or anatomical mechanisms. This objectified and biological view of surgical patients dominates the care system. However, it is a problematic view because it trivialises the necessary understanding of vulnerable patients (Kenward et al. ; Hynnekleiv et al. ). When each person is understood as unique, care actions can never be identical for each patient, despite the fact that the surgical procedure and associated treatment are the determining factors. Instead, daily clinical practice that includes person‐centred care must see the patient as both an object and a lived body. Surgical care practice can then be guided by person‐centred ethics and protection of the vulnerable person (Byrne et al. ; Moore et al. ). To ensure that surgical patients receive high precision nursing care, a project was initiated comprising various activities aimed at promoting person‐centred surgical nursing. This project was developed in accordance with current Swedish legislation, which emphasises person‐centred care and patient involvement (Sveriges Riksdag ). The project was initiated in response to a significant exodus of nurses in recent years, which resulted in the closure of care beds and an increased reliance on temporary nursing staff. In addition, the competence of assistant nurses has deteriorated, as many experienced individuals have retired or left the profession for other reasons. This reduction in skilled personnel among both nurses and assistant nurses has compromised the ability to maintain ‘world‐class care’, strong patient safety and high precision in surgical nursing, which are the goals of a university hospital. The project's objective was to enhance precision nursing and evidence‐based surgical nursing care within this challenging context. The implementation of evidence‐based surgical nursing interventions presents significant challenges, particularly when altering routine clinical practices to achieve excellence in surgical nursing in accordance with nursing core competencies. According to implementation science, the context in which these interventions are performed is crucial (Rogers et al. ). While nursing researchers are highly proficient at generating new evidence to inform healthcare, they are sometimes less effective at translating this new knowledge into clinical practice. Successful implementation of evidence‐based activities into practice is described as a function of the interplay of the following core elements: the nature of the evidence, the environment and the way in which the process is facilitated (Kitson et al. ). A previous study provides evidence of evaluating knowledge translation, highlighting the challenges of translating research‐based knowledge into clinical practice (May et al. ). Hospital settings are often complex in the context of operationalising care processes. Complexity remains a significant barrier, despite the professional and ethical responsibility of organisations to contribute to person‐centred care, as well as the organisation and the profession, by means of new knowledge and improvements (American Nurses Credentialing Center ). Context plays a crucial role in the success of implementation efforts. It encompasses the unique circumstances and factors within which implementation takes place, such as the organisational culture and broader systemic influences. Strong leadership, a supportive environment and adequate resources enhance the success of an implementation. Innovation complexity occurs when the desired change in practice involves multiple steps, s