Dataset Information

Peripheral intravenous cannulation decision-making in emergency settings: a qualitative descriptive study.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Rates of unused ('idle') peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are high but can vary per setting. Understanding factors that influence the decision-making of doctors, nurses and paramedics in the emergency setting regarding PIVC insertion, and what factors may modify their decision is essential to identify opportunities to reduce unnecessary cannulations and improve patient-centred outcomes. This study aimed to understand factors associated with clinicians' decision-making on whether to insert or use a PIVC in the emergency care setting.

Design

A qualitative descriptive study using in-depth semistructured interviews and thematic analysis.

Setting

Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, in a large tertiary level emergency department (ED) and local government ambulance service.

Participants

Participants recruited were ED clinicians (doctors, nurses) and paramedics who regularly insert PIVCs.

Results

From the 15 clinicians interviewed 4 key themes: knowledge and experience, complicated and multifactorial, convenience, anticipated patient clinical course, and several subthemes emerged relating to clinician decision-making across all disciplines. The first two themes focused on decision-making to gather data and evidence, such as knowledge and experience, and decisions being complicated and multifactorial. The remaining two themes related to the actions clinicians took such as convenience and anticipated patient clinical course.

Conclusion

The decision to insert a PIVC is more complicated than clinicians, administrators and policy-makers may realise. When explored, clinician decisions were multifaceted with many factors influencing the decision to insert a PIVC. In actual practice, clinicians routinely insert PIVCs in most patients as a learnt reflex with little cognitive input. When considering PIVC insertion, more time needs to be devoted to the awareness of: (1) decision-making in the context of the clinician's own experience, (2) cognitive biases and (3) patient-centred factors. Such awareness will support an appropriate risk assessment which will benefit the patient, clinician and healthcare system.

SUBMITTER: Evison H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8915296 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Peripheral intravenous cannulation decision-making in emergency settings: a qualitative descriptive study.

Evison Hugo H Carrington Mercedes M Keijzers Gerben G Marsh Nicole M NM Sweeny Amy Lynn AL Byrnes Joshua J Rickard Claire M CM Carr Peter J PJ Ranse Jamie J

BMJ open 20220310 3

<h4>Objectives</h4>Rates of unused (<i>'</i>idle') peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are high but can vary per setting. Understanding factors that influence the decision-making of doctors, nurses and paramedics in the emergency setting regarding PIVC insertion, and what factors may modify their decision is essential to identify opportunities to reduce unnecessary cannulations and improve patient-centred outcomes. This study aimed to understand factors associated with clinicians' decision- ...[more]

PMID: 35273050

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVC) are commonly used in hospital worldwide. However, PIVC are not exempt from complications. Catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI) increase morbidity and mortality rates, and costs for the healthcare organization. PIVC care is shaped by the complex mix of professional and organizational culture, such as knowledge gaps, low perception of impact of PIVCs on patient safety, or lack of hospital guidelines. Aim To explore determinants of decision-making about the prevention of PIVC-BSI among nurses in Spanish hospitals. Methods We conducted a descriptive qualitative study with semi-structured interviews in three public hospitals, the Balearic Islands Health Care Service in Spain. We considered hospital ward nurses working routinely with inpatients at any of the three hospitals for enrolment in the study. We approached relevant informants to identify suitable participants who recruited other participants through a ‘snowball’ technique. Fourteen inpatient nurses from the hospital took part in this study between September and November 2018. We employed several triangulation strategies to underpin the methodological rigour of our analysis and conducted the member checking, showing the information and codes applied in the recording of the interviews to identify the coherence and any discrepancies of the discourse by participants. We used the COREQ checklist for this study. Findings We identified four major themes in the analysis related to determinants of care: The fog of decision-making in PIVC; The taskification of PIVC care; PIVC care is accepted to be suboptimal, yet irrelevant; and chasms between perceived determinants of poor PIVC care and its solutions. Conclusion The clinical management of PIVCs appear ambiguous, unclear, and fragmented, with no clear professional responsibility and no nurse leadership, causing a gap in preventing infections. Furthermore, the perception of low risk on PIVC care impact can cause a relevant lack of adherence to the best evidence and patient safety. Implementing facilitation strategies could improve the fidelity of the best available evidence regarding PIVC care and raise awareness among nurses of impact that excellence of care. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13756-022-01144-5.

Project description:Clinicians’ perspectives of the reasons for performing caesarean section (CS) are fundamental to deepening knowledge and understanding of factors influencing decision-making for CS. The aim of this study was to explore midwives’ and obstetricians’ views of factors influencing decision-making for CS for first-time mothers. A qualitative descriptive study with semi-structured one-to-one audio-recorded interviews was used to gather data from clinicians (15 midwives and 20 senior obstetricians). Following research ethics committee approval, clinicians, who were directly involved in the decision-making process for CS during the period of data collection, were purposively selected from three maternity units in the Republic of Ireland between June 2016 to July 2017. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. Three interrelated themes with several subthemes reflective of clinicians’ views and experiences emerged following data analysis. These were: ‘A fear factor’ describing clinicians’ fear of adverse outcomes and subsequent litigation, ‘Personal preferences versus a threshold–clinician driven factors emphasising the influence of clinicians’ personal beliefs, and ‘Standardised versus individualised care–a system perspective’ explaining the effects of, or lack of, organisational policy and its direct and indirect impact on the decision-making process. Findings show that decisions to perform a CS are, on occasion, based on clinicians’ personal beliefs and interpretation, similar to findings from other published literature. Consideration of broader issues related to organisational, socio-cultural and political context is essential when seeking solutions to the rising CS rates. The findings will enable clinicians to reflect on their day-to-day practice, in order to look for modifiable factors that influence their decision-making, and help women understand the multitude of factors that can lead to a decision to perform a CS. Findings will also contribute to the development of the ‘next step action’ and assist in devising future intervention studies to reduce any unnecessary CSs.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Difficult peripheral intravenous cannulation (DPIVC) is associated with serious complications related to vascular access. These complications might be avoided if the risk factors were identified previously, enabling the detection of potentially difficult situations at an early stage. The aim of this study is to consider these risk factors, to determine the influence of the hospital setting, to examine the association between DPIVC and the different techniques of catheter insertion and to analyse the importance of the clinician's experience in this context. METHODS:Case-control study following a previously published protocol, conducted in 48 units of eight public hospitals in Spain. Adult patients requiring a peripheral intravenous cannula were prospectively included in the study population during their hospital stay. Over a period of 11 months, for consecutive eligible patients, nurses in each participating unit recorded data on their assessment of the vascular access performed and the technique used. Variables related to these medical personnel were also recorded. One of the researchers reviewed the patients' clinical history to compile the relevant health variables and to characterise the healthcare process. The statistical analysis included association tests among the main study variables. The risk factors were analysed using bivariate logistic regression. The variables found to be statistically significant were included in a multivariate logistic regression model incorporating each of the healthcare environments identified. RESULTS:The study population was composed of 2662 patients, of whom 221 (8.3%) presented with DPIVC. A previous history of difficulty, the presence of non-palpable veins, acute upper limb alterations and punctures in the ante-cubital fossa were found to be independent risk factors for DPIVC. Differences were found in the frequency of occurrence of DPIVC and in some risk factors, according to the healthcare context. The variables related to the characteristics of the hospital personnel did not influence the study event. CONCLUSION:The present study identifies four independent risk factors for DPIVC that can be incorporated into algorithms aimed at preventing its occurrence and facilitating the referral of patients to vascular access specialist teams.

Project description:Background:Each year, an estimated 17 million children suffer from severe acute malnutrition (SAM) and 33 million from moderate acute malnutrition (MAM), with many of the most severe cases found in extremely food insecure contexts or conflict situations. Current global outpatient treatment protocols for uncomplicated SAM and MAM, adapted by most countries for use at national level, call for SAM and MAM to be managed separately, however global-level stakeholders have recently begun evaluating simplified and/or combined protocols managing acute malnutrition. Methods:This study analyzes national policy discussions and decision-making around outpatient acute malnutrition treatment for uncomplicated cases in emergency situations in Niger, Nigeria, Somalia, and South Sudan. Data collection (March-July 2018) included semi-structured in-depth interviews with 50 respondents (N?=?11-15 per country) from government, funding agencies, and implementing partners, as well as 11 global and regional stakeholders. We also conducted a document analysis (N?=?10-15 per country and at global level) to situate debates and evaluate current policy. Data were analyzed iteratively using thematic content analysis. Results:We find that while combined/simplified protocols for outpatient management of uncomplicated cases of acute malnutrition are being used in emergency situations in all four countries, there is widespread confusion about protocol terminology and content, stemming from a lack of coherence at the global level. As a result, national-level stakeholders express diverse, if overlapping, rationales for modifying current protocols, which vary given the intensity and scope of the emergency. Without specific global-level guidance, combined/simplified protocols are often used on an ad hoc basis, although the processes for triggering them were at least nominally controlled at the national level. Decisions about when and where to enact "exceptional" modifications to country protocols were often based on inconsistent determinations of what constitutes an "emergency." Respondents said more evidence is needed on both clinical and operational aspects of these protocols, and they awaited clear guidance from global norm-setting agencies. Conclusions:Based on these findings, global-level stakeholders should urgently improve coordination and communication around existing protocols. Standardized guidance based on the available evidence is required to clarify best practices for combined management of SAM and MAM, particularly in emergency contexts (which should be defined) and in situations of limited resources. Given the complexity of governance arrangements in conflict situations, both guidance and updates on research must be disseminated in a rational, systematic, and digestible way to the multiplicity of field actors.

Project description:BackgroundTrauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (TF-CBT) is an evidence-based intervention for youth with posttraumatic stress disorder. An important component of TF-CBT is the trauma narrative (TN), a phase in the intervention in which youth are guided to process the memories, thoughts, and feelings associated with their traumatic experience(s). Previous work has shown that TF-CBT clinicians complete TNs with only half of their clients, yet little is known about what determines TF-CBT clinicians' use of TNs. The behavioral insights literature-an interdisciplinary field studying judgment and decision-making-offers theoretical and empirical tools to conceptualize what drives complex human behaviors and decisions. Drawing from the behavioral insights literature, the present study seeks to understand what determines clinician use of TNs and to generate strategies that target these determinants.MethodsThrough semi-structured qualitative interviews, we sought the perspectives of trained TF-CBT clinicians working in public mental health settings across the city of Philadelphia (N = 17) to understand their decisions to use TNs with clients. We analyzed the qualitative data using a coding approach informed by the behavioral insights literature. We used an iterative process of structured hypothesis generation, aided by a behavioral insights guide, and rapid validation informed by behavioral insights to uncover the determinants of TN use. We then generated implementation strategies that targeted these determinants using the "Easy Attractive Social Timely" framework, a behavioral insights design approach.ResultsWe generated and validated three broad themes about what determines clinician implementation of TNs: decision complexity, clinician affective experience, and agency norms. We hypothesized behavioral insights that underlie these implementation determinants and designed a list of nine corresponding behavioral insights strategies that may facilitate TN implementation.ConclusionsOur study investigated why an effective component of an evidence-based intervention is difficult to implement. We leveraged robust scientific theories and empirical regularities from the behavioral insights literature to understand clinician perspectives on TN implementation. These factors were theoretically linked to implementation strategies. Our work revealed the potential for using behavioral insights in the diagnosis of evidence-based intervention determinants and the design of implementation strategies.

Project description:BackgroundThe eCOVID19 Recommendations Map & Gateway to Contextualization (RecMap) website was developed to identify all COVID-19 guidelines, assess the credibility and trustworthiness of the guidelines, and make recommendations understandable to various stakeholder groups. To date, little has been done to understand and explore parents' experiences when accessing and using the RecMap website for COVID-19 health decision-making.ObjectiveTo explore (1) where parents look for COVID-19 health information and why, (2) parents' user experience when accessing and using the RecMap website to make health decisions, and (3) what knowledge mobilization activities are needed to increase parents' awareness, use, and engagement with the RecMap website.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative descriptive study using semistructured interviews and a think-aloud activity with parents of children aged 18 years or younger living in Canada. Participants were asked to provide feedback on the RecMap website and to "think aloud" as they navigated the website to find relevant COVID-19 health recommendations. Demographic information was collected using a web-based questionnaire. A hybrid deductive and inductive thematic approach guided analysis and data synthesis.ResultsA total of 21 participants (13/21, 62% mothers) were interviewed and participated in a think-aloud activity. The data were categorized into four sections, representative of key elements that deductively and inductively emerged from the data: (1) parent information seeking behaviors and preferences for COVID-19, (2) RecMap website usability, (3) perceived usefulness of the RecMap website, and (4) knowledge mobilization strategies to increase awareness, use, and engagement of the RecMap website. Parents primarily used the internet to find COVID-19 information and focused on sources that they determined to be credible, trustworthy, simple, and engaging. As the pandemic evolved, participants' information-seeking behaviors changed, specifically their topics of interest and search frequency. Most parents were not aware of the RecMap website before this study but found satisfaction with its concept and layout and expressed intentions to use and share it with others. Parents experienced some barriers to using the RecMap website and suggested key areas for improvement to facilitate its usability and perceived usefulness. Recommendations included a more user-friendly home page for lay audiences (separate public-facing user interface), improving the search and filter options, quicker navigation, clearer titles, more family-friendly graphics, and improving mobile-friendly access. Several strategies to disseminate the RecMap website were also expressed, including a mix of traditional and nontraditional methods (handouts and social media) in credible and high-traffic locations that parents frequent often.ConclusionsOverall, parents liked the concept of the RecMap website but had some suggestions to improve its usability (language, navigation, and website interface). These findings can be used to improve the RecMap website for parents and offer insight for the development and dissemination of effective web-based health information tools and resources for the general public.

Project description:BackgroundShared decision-making (SDM) is widely recommended and required by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid for patients considering lung cancer screening (LCS).ObjectiveWe examined clinicians' communication practices and perceived barriers of SDM for LCS at three medical centers with established screening programs.DesignMulticenter qualitative study of clinicians participating in LCS.ApproachWe performed semi-structured interviews, which were transcribed and analyzed using directed content analysis, guided by a theoretical model of patient-clinician communication.ParticipantsWe interviewed 24 clinicians including LCS coordinators (2), pulmonologists (3), and primary care providers (17), 4 of whom worked for the LCS program, a thoracic surgeon, and a radiologist.ResultsAll clinicians agreed with the goal of SDM, to ensure the screening decision was congruent with the patient's values. The depth and type of information presented by each clinician role varied considerably. LCS coordinators presented detailed information including numeric estimates of benefit and harm. Most PCPs explained the process more generally, focusing on logistics and the high rate of nodule detection. No clinician explicitly elicited values or communication preferences. Many PCPs tailored the conversation based on their implicit understanding of patients' values and preferences, gained from past experiences. PCPs reported that time, lack of detailed personal knowledge of LCS, and patient preferences were barriers to SDM. Many clinicians perceived that a significant proportion of patients were not interested in specific percentages and preferred to receive a clinician recommendation.ConclusionsOur results suggest that clinicians support the goal of SDM for LCS decisions but PCPs may not perform some of its elements. The lack of completion of some elements, such as PCPs' lack of in-depth information exchange, may reflect perceived patient preferences for communication. As LCS is implemented, further research is needed to support a personalized, patient-centered approach to produce better outcomes.

Dataset Information

Peripheral intravenous cannulation decision-making in emergency settings: a qualitative descriptive study.

Objectives

Design

Setting

Participants

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Peripheral intravenous cannulation decision-making in emergency settings: a qualitative descriptive study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets