Canadian Journal of Anesthesia最新文献

Purpose

Insufficient evidence-based recommendations to guide care for patients with devastating brain injuries (DBIs) leave patients vulnerable to inconsistent practice at the emergency department (ED) and intensive care unit (ICU) interface. We sought to characterize the beliefs of Canadian emergency medicine (EM) and critical care medicine (CCM) physician site directors regarding current management practices for patients with DBI.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of EM and CCM physician directors of adult EDs and ICUs across Canada (December 2022 to March 2023). Our primary outcome was the proportion of respondents who manage (or consult on) patients with DBI in the ED. We conducted subgroup analyses to compare beliefs of EM and CCM physicians.

Results

Of 303 eligible respondents, we received 98 (32%) completed surveys (EM physician directors, 46; CCM physician directors, 52). Most physician directors reported participating in the decision to withdraw life-sustaining measures (WLSM) for patients with DBI in the ED (80%, n = 78), but 63% of these (n = 62) said this was infrequent. Physician directors reported that existing neuroprognostication methods are rarely sufficient to support WLSM in the ED (49%, n = 48) and believed that an ICU stay is required to improve confidence (99%, n = 97). Most (96%, n = 94) felt that providing caregiver visitation time prior to WLSM was a valid reason for ICU admission.

Conclusion

In our survey of Canadian EM and CCM physician directors, 80% participated in WLSM in the ED for patients with DBI. Despite this, most supported ICU admission to optimize neuroprognostication and patient-centred end-of-life care, including organ donation.

Abstract

Purpose

There is variable and suboptimal use of fascia iliaca compartment nerve blocks (FICBs) in hip fracture care. Our objective was to use an evidence-based and theory-informed implementation science approach to analyze barriers and facilitators to timely administration of FICB and select evidence-based interventions to enhance uptake.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative study at a single centre using semistructured interviews and site observations. We interviewed 35 stakeholders including health care providers, managers, patients, and caregivers. We mapped barriers and facilitators to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We compared the rate and timeliness of FICB administration before and after evidence-based implementation strategies were applied.

Results

The study identified 18 barriers and 11 facilitators within seven themes of influences of FICB use: interpersonal relationships between health care professionals; clinician knowledge and skills related to FICB; roles, responsibilities, and processes for delivering FICB; perceptions on using FICB for pain; patient and caregiver perceptions on using FICB for pain; communication of hip fracture care between departments; and resources for delivering FICBs. We mapped the behaviour change domains to eight implementation strategies: restructure the environment, create and distribute educational materials, prepare patients to be active participants, perform audits and give feedback, use local opinion leaders, use champions, train staff on FICB procedures, and mandate change. We observed an increase in the rates of FICBs administered (48% vs 65%) and a decrease in the median time to administration (1.63 vs 0.81 days).

Conclusion

Our study explains why FICBs are underused and shows that the TDF and CFIR provide a framework to identify barriers and facilitators to FICB implementation. The mapped implementation strategies can guide institutions to improve use of FICB in hip fracture care.