Maria O'Reilly
Queensland University of Technology
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Maria O'Reilly.
Australian Health Review | 2010
Mary D. Courtney; Maria O'Reilly; Helen Edwards; Stacey Hassall
To undertake exploratory benchmarking of a set of clinical indicators of quality care in residential care in Australia, data were collected from 107 residents within four medium-sized facilities (40-80 beds) in Brisbane, Australia. The proportion of residents in each sample facility with a particular clinical problem was compared with US Minimum Data Set quality indicator thresholds. Results demonstrated variability within and between clinical indicators, suggesting breadth of assessment using various clinical indicators of quality is an important factor when monitoring quality of care. More comprehensive and objective measures of quality of care would be of great assistance in determining and monitoring the effectiveness of residential aged care provision in Australia, particularly as demands for accountability by consumers and their families increase.
Australasian Journal on Ageing | 2011
Maria O'Reilly; Mary D. Courtney; Helen Edwards; Stacey Hassall
Aim: Australian residential aged care does not have a system of quality assessment related to clinical outcomes, or comprehensive quality benchmarking. The Residential Care Quality Assessment was developed to fill this gap; and this paper discusses the process by which preliminary benchmarks representing high and low quality were developed for it.
Research in Gerontological Nursing | 2016
Elaine Fielding; Elizabeth Beattie; Maria O'Reilly; Mitchell McMaster
Sampling design is critical to the quality of quantitative research, yet it does not always receive appropriate attention in nursing research. The current article details how balancing probability techniques with practical considerations produced a representative sample of Australian nursing homes (NHs). Budgetary, logistical, and statistical constraints were managed by excluding some NHs (e.g., those too difficult to access) from the sampling frame; a stratified, random sampling methodology yielded a final sample of 53 NHs from a population of 2,774. In testing the adequacy of representation of the study population, chi-square tests for goodness of fit generated nonsignificant results for distribution by distance from major city and type of organization. A significant result for state/territory was expected and easily corrected for by the application of weights. The current article provides recommendations for conducting high-quality, probability-based samples and stresses the importance of testing the representativeness of achieved samples.
Wound Repair and Regeneration | 2018
Kenneth Thistlethwaite; Kathleen Finlayson; P. David Cooper; Bebe Brown; Michael Bennett; Graeme Kay; Maria O'Reilly; Helen Edwards
Over 30% of venous leg ulcers do not heal despite evidence‐based treatment. This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy (HBOT) as an adjunct treatment for nonhealing venous leg ulcers. A randomized, double‐blind, parallel group, placebo‐controlled trial was undertaken in three hyperbaric medicine units. Adults with a venous leg ulcer, Transcutaneous Oxygen Measurement indicative of a hypoxic wound responsive to oxygen challenge, and without contraindications for HBOT; were eligible. Of 84 eligible patients, 10 refused and 74 enrolled. 43 participants achieved over 50% ulcer Percent Area Reduction (PAR) after four weeks of evidence‐based care and were thus excluded from the intervention phase. Thirty‐one participants were randomized to either 30 HBOT treatments (100% oxygen at 2.4 atmospheres absolute (ATA) for 80 minutes), or 30 “placebo” treatments, receiving a validated “sham” air protocol, initially pressurized to 1.2ATA, then cycled between 1.05–1.2ATA for eight minutes before settling at 1.05ATA. The primary outcome was numbers in each group completely healed. Secondary outcomes were ulcer PAR, pain and quality of life, 12 weeks after commencing interventions. The participants’ mean age was 70 years (standard deviation (SD) 12.9) and median ulcer duration at enrolment was 62 weeks (range 4–3120). At 12 weeks, there was no significant difference between groups in the numbers completely healed. The HBOT intervention group had a mean of 95 (SD 6.53) ulcer PAR, compared to 54 (SD 67.8) mean PAR for the placebo group (t = −2.24, p = 0.042, mean difference −40.8, SE 18.2) at 12 weeks. HBOT may improve refractory healing in venous leg ulcers, however patient selection is important. In this study, HBOT as an adjunct treatment for nonhealing patients returned indolent ulcers to a healing trajectory.
Research in Gerontological Nursing | 2018
Elizabeth Beattie; Elaine Fielding; Maria O'Reilly; Deborah Brooks; Margaret MacAndrew; Judy McCrow
Many health and social care research studies report difficulties recruiting sufficient numbers of participants, adding to time and money expenditures and potentially jeopardizing the generalizability of findings. The current article reports the effectiveness and resource requirements of recruitment strategies used in nine dementia-related studies conducted in Australia. Articles, notices, or advertisements in targeted specialist newsletters were the most cost-effective method of recruitment. The use of service providers to aid recruitment yielded mixed results, but was lengthy in terms of research time. Online and social media were low cost but not reliably effective in terms of recruitment potential. Despite using multiple strategies to maximize recruitment, significant challenges were encountered achieving the required sample sizes; in most cases these challenges resulted in delays in the recruitment phase. Implications for researchers in the fields of dementia and general social/health research are discussed. [Res Gerontol Nurs. 2018; 11(3):119-128.].
Australian Health Review | 2007
Mary D. Courtney; Maria O'Reilly; Helen Edwards; Stacey Hassall
International Journal for Quality in Health Care | 2007
Maria O'Reilly; Mary D. Courtney; Helen Edwards
Wound Practice & Research: Journal of the Australian Wound Management Association | 2014
Nicholas Graves; Kathleen Finlayson; Michelle Gibb; Maria O'Reilly; Helen Edwards
International Journal of Evidence-based Healthcare | 2015
Catherine Travers; Margaret MacAndrew; Sonia Hines; Maria O'Reilly; Elaine Fielding; Elizabeth Beattie; Deborah Brooks
Journal of Clinical Nursing | 2017
Helen Edwards; Anne M. Chang; Michelle Gibb; Kathleen Finlayson; Christina Parker; Maria O'Reilly; Jan McDowell; Patricia Shuter