Acceptability of a physiotherapy-led intensive prone positioning service in intensive care: A qualitative study with multidisciplinary clinicians

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Australian Critical Care Pub Date : 2025-01-31 DOI:10.1016/j.aucc.2024.101162
Stacey Haughton BExSci, DPT , Krisha Saravanan BHSc, BPsychHons , Luke A. McDonald BHlthSci, MPhysioPrac , Joleen W. Rose BSci(Hons), BPhysio(Hons) , Sue Berney BPT, PhD , David J. Berlowitz BAppSciPhty, PhD , Thomas C. Rollinson BPhysio(Hons) , Marnie Graco BPhysio(Hons), PhD
{"title":"Acceptability of a physiotherapy-led intensive prone positioning service in intensive care: A qualitative study with multidisciplinary clinicians","authors":"Stacey Haughton BExSci, DPT ,&nbsp;Krisha Saravanan BHSc, BPsychHons ,&nbsp;Luke A. McDonald BHlthSci, MPhysioPrac ,&nbsp;Joleen W. Rose BSci(Hons), BPhysio(Hons) ,&nbsp;Sue Berney BPT, PhD ,&nbsp;David J. Berlowitz BAppSciPhty, PhD ,&nbsp;Thomas C. Rollinson BPhysio(Hons) ,&nbsp;Marnie Graco BPhysio(Hons), PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.aucc.2024.101162","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in an increased number of patients with COVID-19–related respiratory failure requiring prone positioning. To reduce pressure on nursing and medical staff in the intensive care unit (ICU), a physiotherapy-led intensive prone positioning (PhLIP) service was implemented.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The aim of this study was to explore the acceptability of the PhLIP service from the perspective of nurses and doctors working in the ICU and the physiotherapists who delivered the service.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A qualitative evaluation was conducted using semistructured interviews and focus groups, guided by the theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA). Participants included doctors, nurses, and physiotherapists who interacted with or delivered the PhLIP service.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 19 interviews (eight doctors and 11 physiotherapists) and four focus groups (13 nurses) were conducted. Eleven themes were identified within the eight domains of the TFA. Overall, the PhLIP team was highly valued and appreciated (TFA: affective attitude); enabled high-quality care and improved ICU efficiency (TFA: perceived effectiveness); reduced risks to patients and staff (TFA: perceived safety and risk); and was empowering for the clinicians involved (TFA: self-efficacy). Being in the PhLIP team was physically and mentally exhausting, and the service put strain on the physiotherapy department due to reallocation of staff (TFA: burden). Having trust in the physiotherapists leading the prone positioning service was a key influence on nursing and medical acceptance of the service.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The PhLIP team delivered an acceptable service that improved clinical care and efficiency during the COVID-19 pandemic. Other ICUs should consider the availability, skills, and confidence in the team selected to implement an intensive prone positioning service, should the need arise again. Researchers using the TFA to explore acceptability of healthcare innovations should also consider the recipients’ trust in those delivering the intervention.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51239,"journal":{"name":"Australian Critical Care","volume":"38 3","pages":"Article 101162"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1036731424003138","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in an increased number of patients with COVID-19–related respiratory failure requiring prone positioning. To reduce pressure on nursing and medical staff in the intensive care unit (ICU), a physiotherapy-led intensive prone positioning (PhLIP) service was implemented.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to explore the acceptability of the PhLIP service from the perspective of nurses and doctors working in the ICU and the physiotherapists who delivered the service.

Methods

A qualitative evaluation was conducted using semistructured interviews and focus groups, guided by the theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA). Participants included doctors, nurses, and physiotherapists who interacted with or delivered the PhLIP service.

Results

A total of 19 interviews (eight doctors and 11 physiotherapists) and four focus groups (13 nurses) were conducted. Eleven themes were identified within the eight domains of the TFA. Overall, the PhLIP team was highly valued and appreciated (TFA: affective attitude); enabled high-quality care and improved ICU efficiency (TFA: perceived effectiveness); reduced risks to patients and staff (TFA: perceived safety and risk); and was empowering for the clinicians involved (TFA: self-efficacy). Being in the PhLIP team was physically and mentally exhausting, and the service put strain on the physiotherapy department due to reallocation of staff (TFA: burden). Having trust in the physiotherapists leading the prone positioning service was a key influence on nursing and medical acceptance of the service.

Conclusion

The PhLIP team delivered an acceptable service that improved clinical care and efficiency during the COVID-19 pandemic. Other ICUs should consider the availability, skills, and confidence in the team selected to implement an intensive prone positioning service, should the need arise again. Researchers using the TFA to explore acceptability of healthcare innovations should also consider the recipients’ trust in those delivering the intervention.
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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Australian Critical Care
Australian Critical Care NURSING-NURSING
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
148
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Australian Critical Care is the official journal of the Australian College of Critical Care Nurses (ACCCN). It is a bi-monthly peer-reviewed journal, providing clinically relevant research, reviews and articles of interest to the critical care community. Australian Critical Care publishes peer-reviewed scholarly papers that report research findings, research-based reviews, discussion papers and commentaries which are of interest to an international readership of critical care practitioners, educators, administrators and researchers. Interprofessional articles are welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Prevalence and variability in use of physical restraints in intensive care units: A systematic review and meta-analysis Effects of prophylactic non-invasive ventilation on weaning: A systematic review with meta-analysis Harnessing machine learning for predicting successful weaning from mechanical ventilation: A systematic review Multicentre prospective study to establish a risk prediction model on pressure injury in the neonatal intensive and intermediate care units Effects of compassion fatigue, structural empowerment, and psychological empowerment on the caring behaviours of intensive care unit nurses in China: A structural equation modelling 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