Dataset Information

Persistent Barriers to Timely Catheter Removal Identified from Clinical Observations and Interviews.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Indwelling urinary and vascular catheters are valuable devices in patient care, but prolonged or unnecessary use increases the risk of infectious and noninfectious catheter harms.

Methods

To understand persistent barriers to detecting and removing unnecessary catheters, researchers conducted a multimethod qualitative study that included observations and in-person interviews with clinicians working on a progressive care unit of a large hospital. Observations consisted of shadowing nurses during shift change and while admitting patients, and observing physicians during morning rounds. Observational data were gathered using unstructured field notes. Interviews were conducted using a semistructured guide, audio-recorded, and transcribed. Qualitative content analysis was conducted to identify main themes.

Results

Barriers to timely removal identified during 19 interviews with clinicians and 133 hours of field observations included physicians not routinely reviewing catheter necessity during rounds, catheters going unnoticed or hidden under clothing, common use of "Do Not Remove" orders, and little or no discussion of catheters among clinicians. Five overall themes emerged: (1) Catheter data are hard to find, not accurate, or not available; (2) Catheter removal is not a priority; (3) Confusion exists about who has authority to remove catheters; (4) There is a lack of agreement on, and awareness of, standard protocols and indications for removal; and (5) Communication barriers among clinicians create challenges.

Conclusion

To address barriers and facilitate detection and timely removal, clinicians need ready access to accurate catheter data, more clearly delineated clinician roles for prompting removal, effective tools to facilitate discussions about catheter use, and standardized catheter removal protocols.

SUBMITTER: Quinn M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7244360 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Persistent Barriers to Timely Catheter Removal Identified from Clinical Observations and Interviews.

Quinn Martha M Ameling Jessica M JM Forman Jane J Krein Sarah L SL Manojlovich Milisa M Fowler Karen E KE King Elizabeth A EA Meddings Jennifer J

Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety 20191223 2

<h4>Background</h4>Indwelling urinary and vascular catheters are valuable devices in patient care, but prolonged or unnecessary use increases the risk of infectious and noninfectious catheter harms.<h4>Methods</h4>To understand persistent barriers to detecting and removing unnecessary catheters, researchers conducted a multimethod qualitative study that included observations and in-person interviews with clinicians working on a progressive care unit of a large hospital. Observations consisted of ...[more]

PMID: 31879072

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Interprofessional collaboration is increasingly important in healthcare, but interprofessional education (IPE) faces challenges, such as different study programmes with varied schedules and campuses. These challenges can be met, in part, by using web-based virtual patients (VPs) as a tool in IPE. However, demands for relevant patient presentations and clinical practice increase when VPs are used by students from different programmes. The aim of this study was to improve the presentation of professional perspectives regarding nurses and physicians and their collaboration in order to increase the clinical authenticity of existing VPs. METHODS:Clinical observations were conducted to gain familiarity with the context. Semi-structured interviews were performed with individual nurses and physicians with experience of patients with leg ulcers. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS:The clinical observations exposed a lack of interprofessional collaboration in practice with regard to patients with leg ulcers. The interview analysis resulted in two themes: Clinical care and Organizational structure. The theme Clinical care included nursing with a holistic approach to the patient and awareness of the patient's well-being, including nutrition and home situation. The theme Organizational structure revealed a lack of teamwork in primary care. The interviewees stressed learning together and sharing responsibility, and they emphasised the importance of implementing interprofessional learning in the education of nurses and physicians in order to stimulate future teamwork. The VP should offer a broad medical history so that healthcare students are made aware of how a disease can affect the patient's social situation, and thereby illustrate the importance of interprofessional collaboration. The information should also be comprehensive and clear, leading to a diagnosis, so the student can gain clinical knowledge and build a foundation for discussion of treatment. CONCLUSIONS:Interviews and observations in clinical practice can be used to enhance authenticity in VPs for interprofessional learning. A thorough look at authentic clinical environments can enrich and improve educational settings using VPs, and it can highlight the challenges students can encounter in clinical care of the patient and in an organisation with regard to interprofessional collaboration.

Project description:ImportanceCatheter ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) has limited success. Procedural strategies beyond pulmonary vein isolation have failed to consistently improve results. The vein of Marshall contains innervation and AF triggers that can be ablated by retrograde ethanol infusion.ObjectiveTo determine whether vein of Marshall ethanol infusion could improve ablation results in persistent AF when added to catheter ablation.Design, setting, and participantsThe Vein of Marshall Ethanol for Untreated Persistent AF (VENUS) trial was an investigator-initiated, National Institutes of Health-funded, randomized, single-blinded trial conducted in 12 centers in the United States. Patients (N = 350) with persistent AF referred for first ablation were enrolled from October 2013 through June 2018. Follow-up concluded in June 2019.InterventionsPatients were randomly assigned to catheter ablation alone (n = 158) or catheter ablation combined with vein of Marshall ethanol infusion (n = 185) in a 1:1.15 ratio to accommodate for 15% technical vein of Marshall ethanol infusion failures.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was freedom from AF or atrial tachycardia for longer than 30 seconds after a single procedure, without antiarrhythmic drugs, at both 6 and 12 months. Outcome assessment was blinded to randomization treatment. There were 12 secondary outcomes, including AF burden, freedom from AF after multiple procedures, perimitral block, and others.ResultsOf the 343 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 66.5 [9.7] years; 261 men), 316 (92.1%) completed the trial. Vein of Marshall ethanol was successfully delivered in 155 of 185 patients. At 6 and 12 months, the proportion of patients with freedom from AF/atrial tachycardia after a single procedure was 49.2% (91/185) in the catheter ablation combined with vein of Marshall ethanol infusion group compared with 38% (60/158) in the catheter ablation alone group (difference, 11.2% [95% CI, 0.8%-21.7%]; P = .04). Of the 12 secondary outcomes, 9 were not significantly different, but AF burden (zero burden in 78.3% vs 67.9%; difference, 10.4% [95% CI, 2.9%-17.9%]; P = .01), freedom from AF after multiple procedures (65.2% vs 53.8%; difference, 11.4% [95% CI, 0.6%-22.2%]; P = .04), and success achieving perimitral block (80.6% vs 51.3%; difference, 29.3% [95% CI, 19.3%-39.3%]; P < .001) were significantly improved in vein of Marshall-treated patients. Adverse events were similar between groups.Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients with persistent AF, addition of vein of Marshall ethanol infusion to catheter ablation, compared with catheter ablation alone, increased the likelihood of remaining free of AF or atrial tachycardia at 6 and 12 months. Further research is needed to assess longer-term efficacy.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01898221.

Project description:BackgroundInterest in mobile health (mHealth) has increased recently, and research suggests that mHealth devices can enhance end-user engagement, especially when used in conjunction with brief message content.ObjectiveThis research aims to explore the stages of engagement framework for mHealth devices and develop a method to generate brief message content to promote sustained user engagement. This study uses the framework by O'Brien and Toms as a point of departure, where engagement is defined as the uptake or the use of an mHealth device. The framework is a linear repeatable process, including point of engagement, period of engagement, disengagement, and re-engagement. Each stage is characterized by attributes related to a person's technology experience. Although the literature has identified stages of engagement for health-related technology, few studies explore mHealth engagement. Furthermore, little research has determined a method for creating brief message content at each stage in this engagement journey.MethodsInterviews and observations from 19 participants who used mHealth technologies (apps, devices, or wellness websites) in a solo capacity were recruited for sample group 1. In sample group 2, interviews, and observations from 25 participants using mHealth technologies in a group capacity through the Global Corporate Challenge were used. These samples were investigated at 3 time points in both research contexts. The results underwent deductive-inductive thematic analysis for the engagement stages' framework and attributes.ResultsIn addition to the 4 stages identified by O'Brien and Toms, 2 additional stages, self-management and limited engagement, were identified. Self-management captures where users had disengaged from their technology but were still engaged with their health activity. Limited engagement captures where group mHealth users had minimal interaction with their mHealth technology but continued to engage in a group fitness activity. The results revealed that mHealth engagement stages were nonlinear and embedded in a wider engagement context and that each stage was characterized by a combination of 49 attributes that could be organized into 8 themes. Themes documented the total user experience and included technology usability, technology features, technology aesthetics, use motivations, health awareness, goal setting, social support, and interruptions. Different themes were found to have more relevance at different engagement stages. Knowing themes and attributes at all engagement stages allows technology developers and health care professionals to generate relevant brief message content informed by a person-centered approach.ConclusionsThis research extends an existing engagement stages framework and identifies attributes and themes relevant to mHealth technology users' total user experience and incorporates concepts derived from health, business studies, and information systems literature. In addition, we offer a practical 5-step process based on a person-centered approach to develop mHealth technology brief message content for sustained engagement.

Project description:Background The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted many countries to formulate guidelines on how to deal with a worst-case scenario in which the number of patients needing intensive care unit (ICU) care exceeds the number of available beds. This study aims to explore the experiences of triage teams when triaging fictitious patients with the Dutch triage guidelines. It provides an overview of the factors that influence decision-making when performing ICU triage with triage guidelines. Methods Eight triage teams from four hospitals were given files of fictitious patients needing intensive care and instructed to triage these patients. Sessions were observed and audio-recorded. Four focus group interviews with triage team members were held to reflect on the sessions and the Dutch guidelines. The results were analyzed by inductive content analysis. Results The Dutch triage guidelines were the main basis for making triage decisions. However, some teams also allowed their own considerations (outside of the guidelines) to play a role when making triage decisions, for example to help avoid using non-medical criteria such as prioritization based on age group. Group processes also played a role in decision-making: triage choices can be influenced by the triagists’ opinion on the guidelines and the carefulness with which they are applied. Intensivists, being most experienced in prognostication of critical illness, often had the most decisive role during triage sessions. Conclusions Using the Dutch triage guidelines is feasible, but there were some inconsistencies in prioritization between teams that may be undesirable. ICU triage guideline writers should consider which aspects of their criteria might, when applied in practice, lead to inconsistencies or ethically questionable prioritization of patients. Practical training of triage team members in applying the guidelines, including explanation of the rationale underlying the triage criteria, might improve the willingness and ability of triage teams to follow the guidelines closely.

Project description:BackgroundSeveral guideline organizations produce patient versions of clinical practice guidelines (PVGs) which translate recommendations into simple language. A former study of our working group revealed that few guideline organizations publish their methods used to develop PVGs. Clear definitions of PVGs do not prevail and their purposes often remain unclear. We aimed to explore experts' perspectives on developing, disseminating and implementing PVGs to discuss and incorporate these experiences when consenting on methodological guidance and further improving PVGs.MethodsWe conducted 17 semi-structured telephone interviews with international experts working with PVGs from September 2021 through January 2022. We conducted the interviews in English or German, they were recorded and transcribed verbatim. We utilized Mayring's qualitative content analysis with MAXQDA software to analyze the data.ResultsIn two interviews two participants were interviewed at the same time. This resulted in a total of 19 participants from 16 different organizations and eight different countries participated. Most were female (16/19) and their experience in working with PVGs ranged from 1 to 20 years. All follow methodological standards when developing PVGs, but the extent of these standards and their public accessibility differs. Aims and target groups of PVGs vary between organizations. Facilitators for developing PVGs are working with a multidisciplinary team, financial resources, consultation processes and a high-quality underlying CPG. Facilitators for disseminating and implementing PVGs are using various strategies. Barriers, on the other hand, are the lack of these factors. All participants mentioned patient involvement as a key aspect in PVG development.ConclusionThe steps in the PVG development process are largely similar across the countries. Focus is placed on the involvement of patients in the development process, although the extent of participation varies. The experts collectively attribute great importance to PVGs overall, but in order to constantly adapt to medical progress and changing conditions, the focus in the future may be more on formats like living guidelines. Although there are different views on the mandatory development of PVGs, there is a consistent call for more transparency regarding the methodology used for PVGs.

Dataset Information

Persistent Barriers to Timely Catheter Removal Identified from Clinical Observations and Interviews.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Persistent Barriers to Timely Catheter Removal Identified from Clinical Observations and Interviews.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets