Comparison of the Ease-of-use and Preference Between Two Aromatherapy Delivery Methods in the Perioperative Setting

IF 2 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING Journal of Perianesthesia Nursing Pub Date : 2025-01-21 DOI:10.1016/j.jopan.2024.10.015
Elizabeth Dale Penoyer PhD, RN, CCRP, FCNS, FCCM, FAAN , Alison Ruiz MSN, RN, CCRN-K, NPD-BC , Keely DeGroot MSMOB , Aurea Middleton BSN, RN, CCRP , Lauren Skinner MA, CCRP , Leticia Valentin BS, CCRP , Kelly Kollstedt MSN, RN, CAPA , Joy Flores BSN, RN, CCRN
{"title":"Comparison of the Ease-of-use and Preference Between Two Aromatherapy Delivery Methods in the Perioperative Setting","authors":"Elizabeth Dale Penoyer PhD, RN, CCRP, FCNS, FCCM, FAAN ,&nbsp;Alison Ruiz MSN, RN, CCRN-K, NPD-BC ,&nbsp;Keely DeGroot MSMOB ,&nbsp;Aurea Middleton BSN, RN, CCRP ,&nbsp;Lauren Skinner MA, CCRP ,&nbsp;Leticia Valentin BS, CCRP ,&nbsp;Kelly Kollstedt MSN, RN, CAPA ,&nbsp;Joy Flores BSN, RN, CCRN","doi":"10.1016/j.jopan.2024.10.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Nurses at the study hospitals had implemented aromatherapy as an evidence-based intervention to alleviate nausea, pain, and anxiety in patients in the perioperative setting. Initially, they were approved to administer aromatherapy using large, multidose bottles with gauze as the method of delivery; however, nurses recognized that there were many disadvantages to using this method. This led to a nurse-driven initiative to create a new delivery method for aromatherapy with the aid of the Center for Innovation at the organization. Single, individually wrapped packets were developed to overcome the obstacles faced by using the bottled method in partnership with the industry. The purpose of the study was to evaluate nurses' perceptions of the ease-of-use and preference of delivery method of aromatherapy.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>A prospective, comparative, before-and-after observational survey design was used to answer the research question.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Nurses in 2 perioperative hospital settings in the system used the bottled method for 4 months and completed a System Usability Scale (SUS) survey at the end of that period. The individually wrapped method was then used for the next 4 months, followed by another evaluation using the SUS. Participants were asked to choose which method they preferred and their perception of effectiveness of aromatherapy in the perioperative setting and its use as a good adjunct for patient experience on a 5-point Likert scale.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>Twenty-one nurses participated in the bottled method group (pre) and 30 were in the single-packet group (post). An independent sample <em>t</em> test was used to evaluate the differences in the pre- and post-SUS scores. Mean pre scores were 62.5 (±17.8) with an SUS rating of “D” with marginal acceptance. Mean post scores were 81.8 (±12.5) with an SUS rating of “A” with excellent acceptability and were significantly different (<em>P</em> &lt; .000). Nursing perceptions that aromatherapy is a good adjunct for patient experience were positive (3.97/5) and were effective in use in the perioperative setting (4.4/5). Most nurses indicated that the packet delivery method was preferred over the bottled method.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Nurses’ perceptions favored the use of the single-packet delivery method of aromatherapy. A score of 81 on the SUS approximates between the 92nd and 93rd percentile of product use SUS scores. Thus, the findings indicate high ease-of-use for the single-packet version of aromatherapy. Nurse-led innovations, such as this, can impact how care is delivered in the clinical setting.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49028,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Perianesthesia Nursing","volume":"40 4","pages":"Pages 945-948.e1"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Perianesthesia Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1089947224005239","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Nurses at the study hospitals had implemented aromatherapy as an evidence-based intervention to alleviate nausea, pain, and anxiety in patients in the perioperative setting. Initially, they were approved to administer aromatherapy using large, multidose bottles with gauze as the method of delivery; however, nurses recognized that there were many disadvantages to using this method. This led to a nurse-driven initiative to create a new delivery method for aromatherapy with the aid of the Center for Innovation at the organization. Single, individually wrapped packets were developed to overcome the obstacles faced by using the bottled method in partnership with the industry. The purpose of the study was to evaluate nurses' perceptions of the ease-of-use and preference of delivery method of aromatherapy.

Design

A prospective, comparative, before-and-after observational survey design was used to answer the research question.

Methods

Nurses in 2 perioperative hospital settings in the system used the bottled method for 4 months and completed a System Usability Scale (SUS) survey at the end of that period. The individually wrapped method was then used for the next 4 months, followed by another evaluation using the SUS. Participants were asked to choose which method they preferred and their perception of effectiveness of aromatherapy in the perioperative setting and its use as a good adjunct for patient experience on a 5-point Likert scale.

Findings

Twenty-one nurses participated in the bottled method group (pre) and 30 were in the single-packet group (post). An independent sample t test was used to evaluate the differences in the pre- and post-SUS scores. Mean pre scores were 62.5 (±17.8) with an SUS rating of “D” with marginal acceptance. Mean post scores were 81.8 (±12.5) with an SUS rating of “A” with excellent acceptability and were significantly different (P < .000). Nursing perceptions that aromatherapy is a good adjunct for patient experience were positive (3.97/5) and were effective in use in the perioperative setting (4.4/5). Most nurses indicated that the packet delivery method was preferred over the bottled method.

Conclusions

Nurses’ perceptions favored the use of the single-packet delivery method of aromatherapy. A score of 81 on the SUS approximates between the 92nd and 93rd percentile of product use SUS scores. Thus, the findings indicate high ease-of-use for the single-packet version of aromatherapy. Nurse-led innovations, such as this, can impact how care is delivered in the clinical setting.
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
围手术期两种芳香疗法给药方式的易用性和偏好比较。
目的:研究医院的护士将芳香疗法作为一种循证干预措施来缓解围手术期患者的恶心、疼痛和焦虑。最初,他们被批准使用大剂量的多剂量瓶进行芳香疗法,并用纱布作为输送方法;然而,护士们认识到使用这种方法有很多缺点。这导致了一项由护士推动的倡议,在该组织创新中心的帮助下,创造了一种新的香薰治疗方法。单独包装的包装是为了克服与行业合作使用瓶装方法所面临的障碍而开发的。本研究的目的是评估护士对芳香疗法的使用方便程度和递送方式的偏好。设计:采用前瞻性、比较性、前后观察性调查设计来回答研究问题。方法:系统中2家围手术期医院的护士使用瓶装法4个月,并在结束时完成系统可用性量表(SUS)的调查。然后在接下来的4个月里使用单独包装的方法,然后使用SUS进行另一次评估。参与者被要求选择他们喜欢的方法,以及他们对围手术期环境中芳香疗法的有效性的看法,并在5分李克特量表上将其用作患者体验的良好辅助。结果:瓶装法组(前)有21名护士,单包法组(后)有30名护士。采用独立样本t检验来评估sus治疗前后评分的差异。平均预评分为62.5分(±17.8分),SUS评分为“D”,边际接受。平均post得分为81.8(±12.5)分,SUS评分为“A”,可接受性极好,但差异有统计学意义(P)。结论:护士倾向于使用单包香薰递送方法。在SUS上的81分近似于产品使用SUS分数的第92和第93百分位之间。因此,研究结果表明,单包芳香疗法版本的易用性很高。诸如此类由护士主导的创新,可以影响临床环境中提供护理的方式。
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
2.20
自引率
17.60%
发文量
279
审稿时长
90 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of PeriAnesthesia Nursing provides original, peer-reviewed research for a primary audience that includes nurses in perianesthesia settings, including ambulatory surgery, preadmission testing, postanesthesia care (Phases I and II), extended observation, and pain management. The Journal provides a forum for sharing professional knowledge and experience relating to management, ethics, legislation, research, and other aspects of perianesthesia nursing.
期刊最新文献
Preoperative Frailty as a Risk Factor of Adverse Outcomes After Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Dexmedetomidine as an Adjuvant for Spinal Anesthesia in Parturients Undergoing Cesarean Section: A Narrative Review. The Impact of Institutional Level on Postoperative Pain Management in Surgical Patients: A Propensity Score-matched Analysis. Digital Documentation-A Nonprioritized Subject in Higher Nursing Education. A Qualitative Study With Educators. Influence of Frailty on Anesthesia Recovery Time in Elderly Patients Undergoing Curative Colorectal Cancer Resection: A Prospective Study.
×
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:604180095
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