Healthcare worker attitudes on routine non-urological preoperative urine cultures: a qualitative assessment

Julia E. Friberg Walhof, Marin L. Schweizer, Kalpana Gupta, Madisen Brown, Daniel Suh, Judith Strymish, William J. O’Brien, Jeffrey Chan, Kelly Miell, Vanessa Au, Barbara W. Trautner, Kimberly C. Dukes
{"title":"Healthcare worker attitudes on routine non-urological preoperative urine cultures: a qualitative assessment","authors":"Julia E. Friberg Walhof, Marin L. Schweizer, Kalpana Gupta, Madisen Brown, Daniel Suh, Judith Strymish, William J. O’Brien, Jeffrey Chan, Kelly Miell, Vanessa Au, Barbara W. Trautner, Kimberly C. Dukes","doi":"10.1017/ice.2024.85","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Many preoperative urine cultures are of low value and may even lead to patient harms. This study sought to understand practices around ordering preoperative urine cultures and prescribing antibiotic treatment. Design: Open-ended, semi-structured qualitative interviews Setting: 5 Veterans Affairs hospitals. Participants: Interviews with 14 surgeons (9 surgeons, 5 surgical leaders), 7 infectious disease physicians, 8 surgical advanced practice providers (APPs), 1 surgical nurse manager, 3 infectious disease pharmacists, 1 hospitalist, and 1 lab manager. Methods: We interviewed participants using a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. Collected data was coded inductively and with the Dual Process Model (DPM) using MAXQDA software. Data in the “Testing Decision-Making” code was further reviewed using the concept of perceived risk as a sensitizing concept. Results: We identified themes relating to surgeons’ concerns about de-implementing preoperative urine cultures to detect asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) in patients undergoing non-urological procedures: (1) anxiety and uncertainty surrounding missing infection signs spanned surgical specialties, (2) there were perceived risks of negative consequences associated with omitting urine cultures and treatment prior to specific procedure sites and types, and additionally, (3) participants suggested potential routes for adjusting these perceived risks to facilitate de-implementation acceptance. Notably, participants suggested that leadership support and peer engagement could help improve surgeon buy-in. Conclusions: Concerns about perceived risks sometimes outweigh the evidence against routine preoperative urine cultures to detect ASB. Evidence from trusted peers may improve openness to de-implementing preoperative urine cultures.","PeriodicalId":13558,"journal":{"name":"Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2024.85","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Many preoperative urine cultures are of low value and may even lead to patient harms. This study sought to understand practices around ordering preoperative urine cultures and prescribing antibiotic treatment. Design: Open-ended, semi-structured qualitative interviews Setting: 5 Veterans Affairs hospitals. Participants: Interviews with 14 surgeons (9 surgeons, 5 surgical leaders), 7 infectious disease physicians, 8 surgical advanced practice providers (APPs), 1 surgical nurse manager, 3 infectious disease pharmacists, 1 hospitalist, and 1 lab manager. Methods: We interviewed participants using a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. Collected data was coded inductively and with the Dual Process Model (DPM) using MAXQDA software. Data in the “Testing Decision-Making” code was further reviewed using the concept of perceived risk as a sensitizing concept. Results: We identified themes relating to surgeons’ concerns about de-implementing preoperative urine cultures to detect asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) in patients undergoing non-urological procedures: (1) anxiety and uncertainty surrounding missing infection signs spanned surgical specialties, (2) there were perceived risks of negative consequences associated with omitting urine cultures and treatment prior to specific procedure sites and types, and additionally, (3) participants suggested potential routes for adjusting these perceived risks to facilitate de-implementation acceptance. Notably, participants suggested that leadership support and peer engagement could help improve surgeon buy-in. Conclusions: Concerns about perceived risks sometimes outweigh the evidence against routine preoperative urine cultures to detect ASB. Evidence from trusted peers may improve openness to de-implementing preoperative urine cultures.
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
医护人员对常规非泌尿科术前尿培养的态度:定性评估
目的:许多术前尿液培养的价值很低,甚至可能对患者造成伤害。本研究旨在了解术前尿液培养和抗生素治疗处方的使用方法。设计:开放式、半结构化定性访谈 设定:5 家退伍军人事务医院:5 家退伍军人事务医院。参与人员:14 名外科医生(其中包括一名副主任医师访谈对象: 14 名外科医生(9 名外科医生、5 名外科主任)、7 名传染病医生、8 名外科高级医师 (APP)、1 名外科护士长、3 名传染病药剂师、1 名住院医师和 1 名实验室经理。调查方法我们使用半结构化定性访谈指南对参与者进行了访谈。收集到的数据使用 MAXQDA 软件以归纳法和双重过程模型 (DPM) 进行编码。使用感知风险这一敏感概念对 "检验决策 "代码中的数据进行了进一步审查。结果:我们发现了外科医生对取消术前尿培养检测非泌尿外科手术患者无症状菌尿(ASB)的担忧的相关主题:(1)外科医生对错过感染征兆感到焦虑和不确定;(2)他们认为在特定手术部位和类型之前忽略尿液培养和治疗可能会带来不良后果;此外,(3)与会者提出了调整这些风险的潜在途径,以促进对取消实施的接受。值得注意的是,与会者建议领导支持和同行参与有助于提高外科医生的接受度。结论:对感知风险的担忧有时会超过反对常规术前尿培养检测 ASB 的证据。来自值得信赖的同行的证据可能会提高不再实施术前尿液培养的开放性。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Healthcare worker attitudes on routine non-urological preoperative urine cultures: a qualitative assessment Use of human-centric and participatory design for modifying a daily environmental cleaning checklist: a quality improvement study A need for a global alert system for rapid recall of contaminated products to prevent ongoing hospital outbreaks. Impact and learner perspectives of a spaced-education platform to assess hand hygiene auditor competency Development and implementation of the Antimicrobial Stewardship Intervention Scoring Tool at a single pediatric institution
×
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