高压氧治疗期间COVID-19感染防控管理:最佳实践实施项目。

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Jbi Evidence Implementation Pub Date : 2023-12-01 DOI:10.1097/XEB.0000000000000400
Michal Hájek, Dittmar Chmelař, Miroslav Rozložník, Alexandra Lochmanová, Jakub Tlapák, Tereza Vrbová, Miloslav Klugar, Jitka Klugarová
{"title":"高压氧治疗期间COVID-19感染防控管理:最佳实践实施项目。","authors":"Michal Hájek, Dittmar Chmelař, Miroslav Rozložník, Alexandra Lochmanová, Jakub Tlapák, Tereza Vrbová, Miloslav Klugar, Jitka Klugarová","doi":"10.1097/XEB.0000000000000400","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This implementation project compared standard operating procedures, accepted preventive measures, and disinfection procedures between the initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic (first wave: March 15 to May 31, 2020) and the later stages of the pandemic (second and third waves: September 1, 2020 to January 31, 2021).</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This project sought to improve compliance with international evidence-based guidelines and clinical standards for the prevention and control of COVID-19 infection during hyperbaric oxygen therapy taking into account the conditions of the local hospital.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Guided by the JBI evidence implementation framework, seven evidence-based audit criteria were developed for the prevention and control of COVID-19 infection during hyperbaric oxygen therapy. A questionnaire was used to measure compliance in baseline and follow-up audits.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Differences between the baseline and follow-up audits were noted for criteria 6 and 7. Criterion 6 increased from 0% to 100% as the hyperbaric facility was equipped with certified ultraviolet-C radiation for air disinfection during the later period, but this equipment was not available in the initial period of the pandemic. Criterion 7 dropped from 100% in the baseline audit to 0% in the follow-up audit because of a significant increase in the operational burden of the treatment capacity of the facility, which made it impossible to comply with the recommended distancing between patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Differences were found in preventive measures, disinfection procedures, work organization, and approach to care strategy. The project objectives were met and the implementation strategies proved effective. Larger sample sizes would need be needed to confirm the reproducibility of the results.</p>","PeriodicalId":48473,"journal":{"name":"Jbi Evidence Implementation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"COVID-19 infection prevention and control management during hyperbaric oxygen therapy: a best practice implementation project.\",\"authors\":\"Michal Hájek, Dittmar Chmelař, Miroslav Rozložník, Alexandra Lochmanová, Jakub Tlapák, Tereza Vrbová, Miloslav Klugar, Jitka Klugarová\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/XEB.0000000000000400\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This implementation project compared standard operating procedures, accepted preventive measures, and disinfection procedures between the initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic (first wave: March 15 to May 31, 2020) and the later stages of the pandemic (second and third waves: September 1, 2020 to January 31, 2021).</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This project sought to improve compliance with international evidence-based guidelines and clinical standards for the prevention and control of COVID-19 infection during hyperbaric oxygen therapy taking into account the conditions of the local hospital.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Guided by the JBI evidence implementation framework, seven evidence-based audit criteria were developed for the prevention and control of COVID-19 infection during hyperbaric oxygen therapy. A questionnaire was used to measure compliance in baseline and follow-up audits.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Differences between the baseline and follow-up audits were noted for criteria 6 and 7. Criterion 6 increased from 0% to 100% as the hyperbaric facility was equipped with certified ultraviolet-C radiation for air disinfection during the later period, but this equipment was not available in the initial period of the pandemic. Criterion 7 dropped from 100% in the baseline audit to 0% in the follow-up audit because of a significant increase in the operational burden of the treatment capacity of the facility, which made it impossible to comply with the recommended distancing between patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Differences were found in preventive measures, disinfection procedures, work organization, and approach to care strategy. The project objectives were met and the implementation strategies proved effective. Larger sample sizes would need be needed to confirm the reproducibility of the results.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48473,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jbi Evidence Implementation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"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.0000000000000400\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jbi Evidence Implementation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000400","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

摘要

目的:本实施项目比较2019冠状病毒病大流行初期(第一波:2020年3月15日至5月31日)和后期(第二波和第三波:2020年9月1日至2021年1月31日)的标准操作流程、可接受的预防措施和消毒程序。项目简介:本项目旨在结合当地医院的实际情况,提高高压氧治疗期间COVID-19感染防控的国际循证指南和临床标准的合规性。方法:以JBI证据实施框架为指导,制定高压氧治疗期间防控COVID-19感染的7项循证审计标准。使用问卷来衡量基线和后续审计的依从性。结果:基线审计和随访审计在标准6和标准7上存在差异。标准6从0%增加到100%,因为高压设施在后期配备了经过认证的紫外线- c辐射,用于空气消毒,但在大流行初期没有这种设备。标准7从基线审计的100%下降到后续审计的0%,因为该设施的治疗能力的运营负担显著增加,这使得不可能遵守建议的患者之间的距离。结论:在预防措施、消毒程序、工作组织、护理方法等方面存在差异。项目目标已经实现,实施战略证明是有效的。需要更大的样本量来确认结果的可重复性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
COVID-19 infection prevention and control management during hyperbaric oxygen therapy: a best practice implementation project.

Objective: This implementation project compared standard operating procedures, accepted preventive measures, and disinfection procedures between the initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic (first wave: March 15 to May 31, 2020) and the later stages of the pandemic (second and third waves: September 1, 2020 to January 31, 2021).

Introduction: This project sought to improve compliance with international evidence-based guidelines and clinical standards for the prevention and control of COVID-19 infection during hyperbaric oxygen therapy taking into account the conditions of the local hospital.

Methods: Guided by the JBI evidence implementation framework, seven evidence-based audit criteria were developed for the prevention and control of COVID-19 infection during hyperbaric oxygen therapy. A questionnaire was used to measure compliance in baseline and follow-up audits.

Results: Differences between the baseline and follow-up audits were noted for criteria 6 and 7. Criterion 6 increased from 0% to 100% as the hyperbaric facility was equipped with certified ultraviolet-C radiation for air disinfection during the later period, but this equipment was not available in the initial period of the pandemic. Criterion 7 dropped from 100% in the baseline audit to 0% in the follow-up audit because of a significant increase in the operational burden of the treatment capacity of the facility, which made it impossible to comply with the recommended distancing between patients.

Conclusions: Differences were found in preventive measures, disinfection procedures, work organization, and approach to care strategy. The project objectives were met and the implementation strategies proved effective. Larger sample sizes would need be needed to confirm the reproducibility of the results.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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
Comparison of two audit and feedback approaches: descriptive analysis of personal and contextual dynamics. Collaborative implementation science: a Can-SOLVE CKD case example. Improving communication among nursing staff at a children's hospital in the southern United States: a best practice implementation project. Improving the quality of medication administration practices in a tertiary Australian hospital: a best practice implementation project. Cross-disciplinary advance care planning in oncology and palliative care amidst a pandemic: a best practice implementation project.
×
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