Dataset Information

[Agency work in intensive care : Impact of temporary contract work on patient care in intermediate care and intensive care units].

ABSTRACT:

Background

Temporary contract workers are used for the nursing care of intensive care patients, usually by service providers in the sense of temporary employment. If or how temporary contract work has an impact on patient care has scarcely been investigated so far.

Aim

The aim of this systematic review is to describe the available research results on the use of temporary workers in nursing care in intensive and intermediate care units and to summarize the prospective effects on patient outcomes.

Method

Seven databases were systematically searched for English and German language articles using Boolean operators and evaluated according to the PRISMA schema. References of included studies were included in the search and the quality of all included studies was evaluated according to the Hawker criteria.

Result

From a total of 630 datasets viewed, 1 qualitative and 2 quantitative studies were identified and analyzed. The findings of the quantitative studies indicated that the probability of the occurrence of catheter-associated infections can increase with the use of temporary workers, but is more dependent on the size of the unit: For each additional bed, the probability of VAP increases by 14.8% (95%-CI = 1.032-1.277, p = 0.011). However, trends for a decrease in the sepsis rate as soon as fewer temporary workers (hours/patient) were deployed in the intensive care unit (ICU) could not be confirmed.

Conclusion

In the few available studies no evidence was found that the use of temporary workers in intensive care units (ICU) and intermediate care units (IMC) has a significant impact on patient outcomes; however, evidence was found that individual qualifications and working conditions have an influence on outcomes. Further studies should consider what ratio of permanent to temporary workers should be considered uncritical, what qualifications temporary workers should have and to what extent these can be checked.

SUBMITTER: Hermes C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8782819 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PURPOSE: The rate of severe outcomes of patients with 2009 pandemic (A/H1N1) influenza (2009pI) hospitalized in non-intensive care units (ICUs) has not been defined thus far. This study aims to assess the efficacy of the management of patients with influenza-like illness (ILI) of moderate intermediate severity in an infectious diseases unit (IDU) during the first wave of 2009pI and its influence on the burden of ICUs. METHODS: All patients hospitalized from October 27, 2009, to February 5, 2010, with ILI were included in this prospective observational study. The IDU was organized and the staff was trained to provide intermediate care; patients were transferred to the ICU only if they required invasive ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or advanced cardiovascular support. Demographic data, clinical presentation, coexisting medical conditions, and laboratory and radiological findings were recorded and analyzed, as well as treatment and outcome data. RESULTS: Overall, 108 patients (median age 36 years [IQR 27-54], 57.4% males) including 66.7% with ≥ 1 risk factor for severe influenza, 47.2% with confirmed 2009pI by RT-PCR and 63.9% with pneumonia, were enrolled in the study. All subjects received intravenous fluids and 83.3% were administered oseltamivir, 96.3% antibacterials, 19.4% oxygen therapy without ventilatory support, and 10.2% non-invasive ventilation. A total of 106 (98.1%) subjects were discharged after a 6-day median hospital stay [IQR 4-9]. Two patients (1.9%) were transferred to the ICU. There were no deaths. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the aggressive treatment of patients with moderate intermediate severity 2009 pandemic ILI in non-ICU wards may result in a low rate of severe outcomes and brief hospitalization. IDUs, if properly organized for intermediate care, may efficiently provide correct disease management, in addition to complying with infection control requirements, thus reducing the burden of the pandemic on ICUs. Further studies are warranted to evaluate the outcome of patients with moderate intermediate 2009pI in different non-ICU settings.

Project description:Severe acidosis can cause noninvasive ventilation (NIV) failure in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure (AHRF). NIV is therefore contraindicated outside of intensive care units (ICUs) in these patients. Less is known about NIV failure in patients with acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema (ACPE) and obesity hypoventilation syndrome (OHS). Therefore, the objective of the present study was to compare NIV failure rates between patients with severe and non-severe acidosis admitted to a respiratory intermediate care unit (RICU) with AHRF resulting from ACPE, COPD or OHS.We prospectively included acidotic patients admitted to seven RICUs, where they were provided NIV as an initial ventilatory support measure. The clinical characteristics, pH evolutions, hospitalization or RICU stay durations and NIV failure rates were compared between patients with a pH???7.25 and a pH?<?7.25. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the independent risk factors contributing to NIV failure.We included 969 patients (240 with ACPE, 540 with COPD and 189 with OHS). The baseline rates of severe acidosis were similar among the groups (45 % in the ACPE group, 41 % in the COPD group, and 38 % in the OHS group). Most of the patients with severe acidosis had increased disease severity compared with those with non-severe acidosis: the APACHE II scores were 21?±?7.2 and 19?±?5.8 for the ACPE patients (p?<?0.05), 20?±?5.7 and 19?±?5.1 for the COPD patients (p?<?0.01) and 18?±?5.9 and 17?±?4.7 for the OHS patients, respectively (NS). The patients with severe acidosis also exhibited worse arterial blood gas parameters: the PaCO2 levels were 87?±?22 and 70?±?15 in the ACPE patients (p?<?0.001), 87?±?21 and 76?±?14 in the COPD patients, and 83?±?17 and 74?±?14 in the OHS patients (NS)., respectively Further, the patients with severe acidosis required a longer duration to achieve pH normalization than those with non-severe acidosis (patients with a normalized pH after the first hour: ACPE, 8 % vs. 43 %, p?<?0.001; COPD, 11 % vs. 43 %, p?<?0.001; and OHS, 13 % vs. 51 %, p?<?0.001), and they had longer RICU stays, particularly those in the COPD group (ACPE, 4?±?3.1 vs. 3.6?±?2.5, NS; COPD, 5.1?±?3 vs. 3.6?±?2.1, p?<?0.001; and OHS, 4.3?±?2.6 vs. 3.7?±?3.2, NS). The NIV failure rates were similar between the patients with severe and non-severe acidosis in the three disease groups (ACPE, 16 % vs. 12 %; COPD, 7 % vs. 7 %; and OHS, 11 % vs. 4 %). No common predictive factor for NIV failure was identified among the groups.ACPE, COPD and OHS patients with AHRF and severe acidosis (pH???7.25) who are admitted to an RICU can be successfully treated with NIV in these units. These results may be used to determine precise RICU admission criteria.