Patients’ perceptions and knowledge of source isolation for multi-resistant organisms in an Australian metropolitan hospital: A bedside interview with questionnaire study

The aim of this study was to explore perceptions and knowledge of source isolation among hospitalised patients colonised or infected with multi-resistant organisms, to identify if information provided and delivery method are helpful and appropriate, and to identify areas for practice improvements. Purposive sampling was conducted. Between November 2019 and January 2020, bedside interviews with structured questionnaires (combining multiple-choice and free-text questions) were conducted with adult in-patients requiring isolation for multi-resistant organisms in a 180-bed metropolitan hospital in Brisbane, Australia. Data analysis included quantifying multiple-choice responses and thematic analysis of free-text responses. Thirty participants completed the interview questionnaire. Lack of awareness and understanding of multi-resistant organisms was evident. Participants reported a preference for face-to-face education (96.7%) and information brochures (86.7%), rather than phone call (33.3%) or informative video (0%). Qualitative responses revealed communication and information deficits exacerbated patients’ negative psychological impacts including embarrassment, loneliness, abandonment, confusion and fear. Participants identified that clinicians need better communication skills and knowledge of multi-resistant organisms to recognise and ameliorate the effect of source isolation on patients. In conclusion, patients in source isolation reported that they do not receive adequate information. Enhancing clinician knowledge of multi-resistant organisms and improving communication skills may help address the psychological needs of these patients. Experience Framework This article is associated with the Quality & Clinical Excellence lens of The Beryl Institute Experience Framework (https://www.theberylinstitute.org/ExperienceFramework). Access other PXJ articles related to this lens. Access other resources related to this lens

Nurses’ education, knowledge and perceptions of peripheral intravenous catheter management: A web-based, cross-sectional survey

Background: Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are the most used invasive medical device. Unfortunately, PIVCs fail for a variety of reasons and failure often results in serious adverse events leading to patient discomfort, infection, delays in treatment, increased healthcare costs, and even death. In Australia, qualified nurses assess, manage, and remove a PIVC as part of their clinical role. To date, no study has described the current state of knowledge and confidence (self-efficacy) about PIVCs from the perspectives of qualified nurses working in Australian hospital settings. Aims: To describe the current state of knowledge and confidence (self-efficacy) about PIVC management from the perspectives of qualified nurses working in Australian hospital settings. To explore how these related to the education received by these nurses. Methods: An online cross-sectional survey. Findings: Qualified nurses in Australia thought that education about PIVCs was important and that it should be underpinned by evidence-based guidelines. Knowledge Test score for the sample was 12.4/17 (SD 2.1), this equates to a mean grade of 73.0%. Respondents reported very high levels of confidence about caring for a patient with a PIVC in situ. Conclusion: Despite the frequent and increasing use of PIVCs and importantly the documented adverse events associated with poor assessment, management and inappropriate removal, qualified nurses’ knowledge and confidence remain poorly reported. We demonstrated fundamental gaps in qualified nurses’ knowledge in relation to assessment, management, and removal of PIVCs

The burden of peripheral intravenous catheters in older hospital inpatients : a national cross-sectional study part of the One Million Global Peripheral Intravenous Catheters Collaboration

Objectives: To investigate the burden of peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) in older hospitalised patients. Methods: A cross-sectional prospective observational study (2014/2015) to describe the characteristics, indications and outcomes of PIVCs among patients aged ≥65 from 65 Australian hospitals. Results: Amongst 2179 individual PIVCs (in 2041 patients, mean age 77.6 years, 45% female, 58% in NSW), 43% were inserted by doctors and 74% used that day, meaning 25% were ‘idle’. Overall, 18% (393/2179) exhibited signs of PIVC-related complications. Most commonly exhibited PIVC-related complications were tenderness (4.1%) and local redness (1.8%). Nearly one in three (29.1%) dressings was soiled, loosened or had come off, and only 36.8% had the time and date documented on the dressing. Both infusing IV medications (aOR 1.74, 95% CI 1.28–2.38, p 84 years) was independently associated with lower likelihood of a high score (aOR 0.71, 95% CI 0.54–0.94, p = 0.02). Conclusions: Given 1 in 5 PIVCs were identified with having complications, further research should focus on optimising PIVC use in older patients

Use of short peripheral intravenous catheters: characteristics, management, and outcomes worldwide

BACKGROUND: Peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) use in health care is common worldwide. Failure of PIVCs is also common, resulting in premature removal and replacement. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the characteristics, management practices, and outcomes of PIVCs internationally. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING/PATIENTS: Hospitalized patients from rural, regional, and metropolitan areas internationally. MEASUREMENTS: Hospital, device, and inserter characteristics were collected along with assessment of the catheter insertion site. PIVC use in different geographic regions was compared. RESULTS: We reviewed 40,620 PIVCs in 51 countries. PIVCs were used primarily for intravenous medication (n = 28,571, 70%) and predominantly inserted in general wards (n = 22,167, 55%). Two-thirds of all devices were placed in non-recommended sites such as the hand, wrist, or antecubital veins. Nurses inserted most PIVCs (n = 28,575, 71%); although there was wide regional variation (26% to 97%). The prevalence of idle PIVCs was 14% (n = 5,796). Overall, 10% (n = 4,204) of PIVCs were painful to the patient or otherwise symptomatic of phlebitis; a further 10% (n = 3,879) had signs of PIVC malfunction; and 21% of PIVC dressings were suboptimal (n = 8,507). Over one-third of PIVCs (n = 14,787, 36%) had no documented daily site assessment and half (n = 19,768, 49%) had no documented date and time of insertion. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that many PIVCs were placed in areas of "exion, were symptomatic or idle, had suboptimal dressings, or lacked adequate documentation. This suggests inconsistency between recommended management guidelines for PIVCs and current practice

Nursing considerations to complement the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines

Objectives: To provide a series of recommendations based on the best available evidence to guide clinicians providing nursing care to patients with severe sepsis. Design: Modified Delphi method involving international experts and key individuals in subgroup work and electronic-based discussion among the entire group to achieve consensus. Methods: We used the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines as a framework to inform the structure and content of these guidelines. We used the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to rate the quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations, with grade 1 indicating clear benefit in the septic population and grade 2 indicating less confidence in the benefits in the septic population. In areas without complete agreement between all authors, a process of electronic discussion of all evidence was undertaken until consensus was reached. This process was conducted independently of any funding. Results: Sixty-three recommendations relating to the nursing care of severe sepsis patients are made. Prevention recommendations relate to education, accountability, surveillance of nosocomial infections, hand hygiene, and prevention of respiratory, central line-related, surgical site, and urinary tract infections, whereas infection management recommendations related to both control of the infection source and transmission-based precautions. Recommendations related to initial resuscitation include improved recognition of the deteriorating patient, diagnosis of severe sepsis, seeking further assistance, and initiating early resuscitation measures. Important elements of hemodynamic support relate to improving both tissue oxygenation and macrocirculation. Recommendations related to supportive nursing care incorporate aspects of nutrition, mouth and eye care, and pressure ulcer prevention and management. Pediatric recommendations relate to the use of antibiotics, steroids, vasopressors and inotropes, fluid resuscitation, sedation and analgesia, and the role of therapeutic end points. Conclusion: Consensus was reached regarding many aspects of nursing care of the severe sepsis patient. Despite this, there is an urgent need for further evidence to better inform this area of critical care

Helping nurses help PIVCs: Decision aids for daily assessment and maintenance

Improving the safety and quality of health care relies on implementing evidence-based findings into every-day clinical practice. Numerous clinical decision aids have been developed to guide nursing care of the patient with a peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC), including standards, guidelines, decision frameworks, bundles, policies, procedures, algorithms, pathways, checklists and scoring tools. While all are created with the intention of facilitating the delivery of safe, effective nursing care and improving patient outcomes, there are distinct differences in methodology and design between them, and many are based on expert opinion and historical practice rather than high-quality evidence. This paper reviews the types of decision aids for daily PIVC assessment and management, explores the evidence base underpinning them, and considers the implications for their use in clinical practice. A consistent, systematic and evidence-based approach to PIVC care will provide the optimal environment for achieving quality patient outcomes.Griffith Health, School of Nursing and MidwiferyFull Tex

Association between emergency department length of stay and patient outcomes : A systematic review

In this review, we investigate associations between time spent in the emergency department (ED) and patient reported outcomes. ED staff provide initial assessment, treatment and referral to patients presenting with an acute status to the hospital 24 h a day. ED length of stay, including ED boarding, and treatment received in the ED may affect patient outcomes. In this review we considered published studies that explored the association of ED length of stay of individuals of any age with their subsequent outcomes, including mortality and inpatient length of stay (IPLOS). Joanna Briggs Institute methods for systematic reviews of association were followed. Search strategies were developed to identify studies published in English since 2000 for inclusion. Two reviewers assessed the studies for inclusion and methodological quality and extracted data independently. In total, 34 studies were included in the review, including one case-control, one analytical cross-sectional, and 32 retrospective cohort studies, with a total sample size of 2,308,840 patients. Overall, there were variable associations of time spent in the ED and mortality, IPLOS, time-to-treatment and adverse events. However, findings indicated that older people are at risk for longer ED stays. They may also experience higher mortality. Specific focus should be placed upon elderly people in the ED, to reduce their exposure to the ED environment where possible and to implement focused initiatives that address their specific and complex treatment needs. We conclude that the diversity of individual settings and health systems will require locally defined and relevant solutions to locally identified issues.</p

The easy option? : Australian findings on mothers’ perception of elective caesarean as a birth choice after a prior caesarean section

As the rate of primary and repeat Caesareans around the world increases, obstetricians, midwives and primary careproviders are being expected to provide counsel to women seeking information regarding birth choices for delivery after a prior emergency Caesarean. This article seeks to contribute to the knowledge on this topic by presenting research findings from a qualitative study designed to explore, from the mothers’ perspective, the decision-making experience with regards to subsequent birth choice for women who have previously delivered by Caesarean section. Specifically, the findings in this article present the perspective of the mothers who opted for elective Caesarean. Eighty per cent of mothers in this study chose elective Caesarean for reasons of fear and the desire to retain some control over the birthing process. For many, this decision is made prior to or early in pregnancy without any openness to consider other possibilities. Thus, the findings strongly emphasize the importance of understanding and taking into consideration the mothers’ psychosocial perspective on birth choices as a key to providing counsel and support