重症监护病房护士对患者疼痛、谵妄和镇静评估的看法:定性研究。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Australian Critical Care Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.aucc.2024.05.013
Anu Correya RN, MScNurs , Helen Rawson RN, PhD , Cherene Ockerby BA (Hons) , Alison M. Hutchinson RN, PhD
{"title":"重症监护病房护士对患者疼痛、谵妄和镇静评估的看法:定性研究。","authors":"Anu Correya RN, MScNurs ,&nbsp;Helen Rawson RN, PhD ,&nbsp;Cherene Ockerby BA (Hons) ,&nbsp;Alison M. Hutchinson RN, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.aucc.2024.05.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Pain, delirium, and sedation should be assessed routinely using validated assessment scales. Inappropriately managed pain, delirium, and sedation in critically ill patients can have serious consequences regarding mortality, morbidity, and increased healthcare costs. Despite the benefits of a bundled approach to pain, delirium, and sedation assessments, few studies have explored nurses' perceptions of using validated scales for such assessments. Furthermore, no studies have examined nurses’ perceptions of undertaking these assessments as a bundled approach.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The objective of this study was to explore nurses’ knowledge, perceptions, attitudes, and experiences regarding the use of validated pain, delirium, and sedation assessment tools as a bundled approach in the intensive care unit (ICU).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A qualitative exploratory descriptive design was adopted. We conducted four focus groups and 10 individual interviews with 23 nurses from a 26-bed adult ICU at an Australian metropolitan tertiary teaching hospital. Data were analysed using thematic analysis techniques.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>Four themes were identified: (i) factors impacting nurses' ability to undertake pain, delirium, and sedation assessments in the ICU; (ii) use, misuse, and nonuse of tools and use of alternative strategies to assess pain, delirium, and sedation; (iii) implementing assessment tools; and (iv) consequences of suboptimal pain, delirium, and sedation assessments. A gap was found in nurses’ use of validated scales to assess pain, delirium, and sedation as a bundled approach, and they were not familiar with using a bundled approach to assessment.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The practice gap could be addressed using a carefully planned implementation strategy. Strategies could include a policy and protocol for assessing pain, delirium, and sedation in the ICU, engagement of change champions to facilitate uptake of the strategy, reminder and feedback systems, further in-service education, and ongoing workplace training for nurses.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51239,"journal":{"name":"Australian Critical Care","volume":"38 1","pages":"Article 101076"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nurses’ perceptions of patient pain, delirium, and sedation assessments in the intensive care unit: A qualitative study\",\"authors\":\"Anu Correya RN, MScNurs ,&nbsp;Helen Rawson RN, PhD ,&nbsp;Cherene Ockerby BA (Hons) ,&nbsp;Alison M. Hutchinson RN, PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.aucc.2024.05.013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Pain, delirium, and sedation should be assessed routinely using validated assessment scales. Inappropriately managed pain, delirium, and sedation in critically ill patients can have serious consequences regarding mortality, morbidity, and increased healthcare costs. Despite the benefits of a bundled approach to pain, delirium, and sedation assessments, few studies have explored nurses' perceptions of using validated scales for such assessments. Furthermore, no studies have examined nurses’ perceptions of undertaking these assessments as a bundled approach.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The objective of this study was to explore nurses’ knowledge, perceptions, attitudes, and experiences regarding the use of validated pain, delirium, and sedation assessment tools as a bundled approach in the intensive care unit (ICU).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A qualitative exploratory descriptive design was adopted. We conducted four focus groups and 10 individual interviews with 23 nurses from a 26-bed adult ICU at an Australian metropolitan tertiary teaching hospital. Data were analysed using thematic analysis techniques.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>Four themes were identified: (i) factors impacting nurses' ability to undertake pain, delirium, and sedation assessments in the ICU; (ii) use, misuse, and nonuse of tools and use of alternative strategies to assess pain, delirium, and sedation; (iii) implementing assessment tools; and (iv) consequences of suboptimal pain, delirium, and sedation assessments. A gap was found in nurses’ use of validated scales to assess pain, delirium, and sedation as a bundled approach, and they were not familiar with using a bundled approach to assessment.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The practice gap could be addressed using a carefully planned implementation strategy. Strategies could include a policy and protocol for assessing pain, delirium, and sedation in the ICU, engagement of change champions to facilitate uptake of the strategy, reminder and feedback systems, further in-service education, and ongoing workplace training for nurses.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51239,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Critical Care\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 101076\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"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/S1036731424001127\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1036731424001127","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

摘要

背景:应使用经过验证的评估量表对疼痛、谵妄和镇静进行常规评估。重症患者的疼痛、谵妄和镇静处理不当会在死亡率、发病率和医疗成本增加方面造成严重后果。尽管捆绑式疼痛、谵妄和镇静评估方法有很多好处,但很少有研究探讨护士对使用有效量表进行此类评估的看法。此外,也没有研究探讨过护士对以捆绑方式进行这些评估的看法:本研究旨在探讨重症监护病房(ICU)护士对使用有效的疼痛、谵妄和镇静评估工具作为捆绑方法的认知、看法、态度和经验:采用定性探索性描述设计。我们对澳大利亚一家大都市三级教学医院拥有 26 张病床的成人重症监护病房的 23 名护士进行了 4 次焦点小组讨论和 10 次个别访谈。我们使用主题分析技术对数据进行了分析:确定了四个主题:(i) 影响护士在重症监护室进行疼痛、谵妄和镇静评估能力的因素;(ii) 使用、滥用和不使用工具以及使用替代策略来评估疼痛、谵妄和镇静;(iii) 实施评估工具;以及 (iv) 未达到最佳疼痛、谵妄和镇静评估效果的后果。研究发现,护士在使用有效量表以捆绑方式评估疼痛、谵妄和镇静方面存在差距,而且她们并不熟悉使用捆绑方式进行评估:结论:可以通过精心策划的实施策略来解决实践差距问题。策略可包括制定重症监护病房疼痛、谵妄和镇静评估的政策和协议,聘请变革倡导者以促进策略的采纳,建立提醒和反馈系统,进一步开展在职教育,以及对护士进行持续的工作场所培训。
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
Nurses’ perceptions of patient pain, delirium, and sedation assessments in the intensive care unit: A qualitative study

Background

Pain, delirium, and sedation should be assessed routinely using validated assessment scales. Inappropriately managed pain, delirium, and sedation in critically ill patients can have serious consequences regarding mortality, morbidity, and increased healthcare costs. Despite the benefits of a bundled approach to pain, delirium, and sedation assessments, few studies have explored nurses' perceptions of using validated scales for such assessments. Furthermore, no studies have examined nurses’ perceptions of undertaking these assessments as a bundled approach.

Objectives

The objective of this study was to explore nurses’ knowledge, perceptions, attitudes, and experiences regarding the use of validated pain, delirium, and sedation assessment tools as a bundled approach in the intensive care unit (ICU).

Methods

A qualitative exploratory descriptive design was adopted. We conducted four focus groups and 10 individual interviews with 23 nurses from a 26-bed adult ICU at an Australian metropolitan tertiary teaching hospital. Data were analysed using thematic analysis techniques.

Findings

Four themes were identified: (i) factors impacting nurses' ability to undertake pain, delirium, and sedation assessments in the ICU; (ii) use, misuse, and nonuse of tools and use of alternative strategies to assess pain, delirium, and sedation; (iii) implementing assessment tools; and (iv) consequences of suboptimal pain, delirium, and sedation assessments. A gap was found in nurses’ use of validated scales to assess pain, delirium, and sedation as a bundled approach, and they were not familiar with using a bundled approach to assessment.

Conclusion

The practice gap could be addressed using a carefully planned implementation strategy. Strategies could include a policy and protocol for assessing pain, delirium, and sedation in the ICU, engagement of change champions to facilitate uptake of the strategy, reminder and feedback systems, further in-service education, and ongoing workplace training for nurses.
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
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
Wellbeing as perceived and experienced by intensive care unit nurses: An interpretive qualitative analysis Employer-provided wellbeing support for nurses working in intensive care units: A national cross-sectional study Understanding crisis needs among family caregivers of patients in critical care: A qualitative analysis Antidepressant use, but not polypharmacy, is associated with worse outcomes after in-hospital cardiac arrest in older people “Because I couldn't understand and respond”: A mixed-method study examining the impact of language barriers on patient experiences of intensive care unit outreach team care
×
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