Procedural sedation of adult patients in the emergency department: a best practice implementation project.

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Jbi Evidence Implementation Pub Date : 2024-01-09 DOI:10.1097/XEB.0000000000000406
Jessica Pickens, Candon Garbo
{"title":"Procedural sedation of adult patients in the emergency department: a best practice implementation project.","authors":"Jessica Pickens, Candon Garbo","doi":"10.1097/XEB.0000000000000406","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The emergency department is a fast-paced and complex health care setting, where critical care is provided to patients of all ages. However, various environmental factors, such as high patient volumes, overburdened staff, and frequent nurse turnover, can hinder the use of evidence-based practices during procedural sedation. Proper patient monitoring is essential to prevent adverse events during procedural sedation.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The goal of this implementation project was to enhance compliance with best practices for patient monitoring during procedural sedation in the emergency department.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The project used the JBI Model of Evidence-Based Healthcare and JBI's Getting Research into Practice (GRiP) tool for implementing evidence-based monitoring practices for adult patients during procedural sedation in the emergency department. A baseline audit was conducted to assess current practice against evidence-based recommendations, followed by the implementation of strategies to improve compliance with best practices. The project concluded with a follow-up audit to determine any improvement in practice.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The baseline audit revealed 81% overall compliance with evidence-based practice. Three barriers were identified, namely, lack of staff education, increased turnover rate of nurses, and the need for nurses to be mobile during procedural sedation. Strategies were implemented to improve compliance with evidence-based practice. The follow-up audit showed an overall improvement of 95% after project implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The project improved best practices for patient monitoring during procedural sedation in the emergency department. However, more work remains to be done to ensure the sustainability of the best practices, including monitoring of end-tidal capnography and vital sign assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":48473,"journal":{"name":"Jbi Evidence Implementation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jbi Evidence Implementation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000406","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The emergency department is a fast-paced and complex health care setting, where critical care is provided to patients of all ages. However, various environmental factors, such as high patient volumes, overburdened staff, and frequent nurse turnover, can hinder the use of evidence-based practices during procedural sedation. Proper patient monitoring is essential to prevent adverse events during procedural sedation.

Objectives: The goal of this implementation project was to enhance compliance with best practices for patient monitoring during procedural sedation in the emergency department.

Methods: The project used the JBI Model of Evidence-Based Healthcare and JBI's Getting Research into Practice (GRiP) tool for implementing evidence-based monitoring practices for adult patients during procedural sedation in the emergency department. A baseline audit was conducted to assess current practice against evidence-based recommendations, followed by the implementation of strategies to improve compliance with best practices. The project concluded with a follow-up audit to determine any improvement in practice.

Results: The baseline audit revealed 81% overall compliance with evidence-based practice. Three barriers were identified, namely, lack of staff education, increased turnover rate of nurses, and the need for nurses to be mobile during procedural sedation. Strategies were implemented to improve compliance with evidence-based practice. The follow-up audit showed an overall improvement of 95% after project implementation.

Conclusions: The project improved best practices for patient monitoring during procedural sedation in the emergency department. However, more work remains to be done to ensure the sustainability of the best practices, including monitoring of end-tidal capnography and vital sign assessment.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
急诊科成人患者的手术镇静:最佳实践实施项目。
导言:急诊科是一个快节奏和复杂的医疗环境,需要为各个年龄段的患者提供重症护理。然而,病人数量多、工作人员负担过重、护士流动频繁等各种环境因素会阻碍在程序性镇静过程中使用循证实践。适当的患者监测对于防止手术镇静过程中发生不良事件至关重要:本实施项目的目标是提高急诊科在程序性镇静过程中患者监护最佳实践的依从性:方法:该项目采用JBI循证医疗模式和JBI的 "将研究付诸实践"(GRiP)工具,对急诊科成人患者在手术镇静期间实施循证监护。先进行基线审计,根据循证建议评估当前的实践,然后实施策略,以提高最佳实践的合规性。项目结束时还进行了后续审核,以确定实践中是否有任何改进:结果:基线审计显示,对循证实践的总体遵守率为 81%。结果:基线审计显示,循证实践的总体合规率为 81%,其中发现了三个障碍,即缺乏员工教育、护士流动率增加以及程序镇静过程中护士需要移动。为提高循证实践的依从性,实施了相关策略。后续审计显示,项目实施后,总体改善率达到 95%:该项目改进了急诊科程序性镇静过程中患者监护的最佳实践。然而,要确保最佳实践的可持续性,包括潮气末二氧化碳造影监测和生命体征评估,仍有许多工作要做。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
13.00%
发文量
23
期刊最新文献
Planning for implementation success: insights from conducting an implementation needs assessment. Evidence-informed decision-making in public health in Canada: a qualitative exploration. Interruption reduction during oral medication rounds among nurses in hematology-oncology wards: a best practice implementation project. Promoting sleep and rest in hospitalized children: a best practice implementation project. Knowledge mapping of barriers and strategies for clinical practice guideline implementation: a bibliometric analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1