Risk for corneal injury in intensive care unit patients: A cohort study

Prevalence and risk factors of exposure keratopathy among critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To identify the incidence, prevalence and risk factors of exposure keratopathy (EK) among critically ill patients.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis, in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 Statement.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database (CNKI), Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM), Weipu Database (VIP) and WanFang Database were systematically searched from inception to June 2022. Observational studies that reported EK among paediatric and adult critically ill patients were screened and included original articles based on the inclusion criteria. Two reviewers independently completed data extraction and quality assessments. Subgroup analysis investigated potential causes of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Of the 4508 studies identified, 23 studies involving 3519 subjects were included. The pooled prevalence of EK was 34.0%, and the pooled incidence rate of EK was 23.0%. Risk factors associated with EK in critically ill patients included lagophthalmos, chemosis, eye blinks <5 times per minute, mechanical ventilation, sedation, lower Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score and higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score.

CONCLUSION

This review shows that EK rates are high in critically ill patients and are influenced by multiple factors. Medical staff should pay more attention to EK in critically ill patients, conduct professional evaluations and implement targeted eye care protocols to reduce its occurrence.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study shows the frequency of and multiple risk factors for EK in critically ill patients, which provides evidence-based guidance for nurses to evaluate the risk of EK in critically ill patients and take appropriate precautions to reduce the risk.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/) (CRD42022346964).

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

No patient or public contribution.

Causal validation of the risk for corneal injury in critically ill adults

BACKGROUND

The validity of a nursing diagnosis depends on a continuous investigation process in different populations to provide clinical evidence. The risk for corneal injury nursing diagnosis was approved in 2013 and only reviewed in 2017, demonstrating the need to perform a clinical validation to improve it.

AIM

To perform a causal validation of the risk for corneal injury nursing diagnosis in critically ill adults.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective cohort study was performed in two intensive critical care units in Northern Brazil with adults aged over 18 years without corneal injury at admission. The patients were evaluated for 10 days, using a data collection tool composed of risk factors for the risk for corneal injury nursing diagnosis. The independent variables were described through absolute and relative frequency. The accuracy measures and risk factors were identified through Cox regression, considering a 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

The nurses assessed 209 critically ill adults and identified that 76.0% of them presented the risk for corneal injury nursing diagnosis, with 16.3% developing a corneal injury, all having previously presented the risk for corneal injury nursing diagnosis. The risk factors identified were eyeball exposure (hazard ratio: 1.78; 95% CI: 1.27-2.51), Glasgow score < 6 (hazard ratio: 1.73; 95% CI: 1.15-2.60) and periorbital oedema (hazard ratio: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.03-1.99), with these factors showing high specificity, and the mechanical ventilation variable, showing high sensitivity, with ROC curve of .86.

CONCLUSION

Eyeball exposure, Glasgow score < 6 and periorbital oedema are the risk factors of the risk for corneal injury nursing diagnosis, in critically ill adults. These risk factors guide nursing interventions. This causal validation can improve the risk for corneal injury nursing diagnosis levels of evidence in the NANDA International Taxonomy.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

It is necessary to guide nursing interventions for critically ill adults with lowered level of consciousness and corneal exposure for the prevention of corneal injury.

Nursing interventions to prevent corneal injury in critically ill sedated and mechanically ventilated patients: A systematic review of interventions

OBJECTIVE

To identify the effectiveness of interventions to prevent corneal injury in critically ill, sedated, and mechanically ventilated patients.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

A systematic review of intervention studies was conducted in the following electronic databases: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Literature in Health Sciences, LIVIVO, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science, and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Study selection and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. Quality assessment of the randomized and non-randomized studies was performed using the Risk of Bias (RoB 2.0) and ROBINS-I Cochrane tools, respectively, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies. The certainty of the evidence was assessed according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system.

RESULTS

15 studies were included. Meta-analysis showed that the risk of corneal injury in the lubricants group was 66% lower (RR = 0.34; 95 %CI: 0.13-0.92) than in the eye-taping group. The risk of corneal injury in the polyethylene chamber was 68% lower than in the eye ointment group (RR = 0.32; 95 %CI 0.07-1.44). The risk of bias was low in most of the studies included and the certainty of the evidence was evaluated.

CONCLUSIONS

The most effective interventions to prevent corneal injury in critically ill sedated mechanically ventilated, who have compromised blinking and eyelid closing mechanisms, are ocular lubrication, preferably gel or ointment, and protection of the corneas with a polyethylene chamber.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

Critically ill, sedated, and mechanically ventilated patients who have compromised blinking and eyelid closing mechanisms must receive interventions to prevent corneal injury. Ocular lubrication, preferably gel or ointment, and protection of the corneas with a polyethylene chamber were the most effective interventions to prevent corneal injury in critically ill, sedated, and mechanically ventilated patients. A polyethylene chamber must be made commercially available for critically ill, sedated, and mechanically ventilated patients.

Clinical indicators, nursing diagnoses, and mortality risk in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a retrospective cohort

OBJECTIVE

To identify clinical indicators and nursing diagnoses with the highest risk of mortality in critically ill patients with COVID-19.

METHOD

Retrospective cohort with the population of adults and elderly people with COVID-19 from an Intensive Care Unit. Categorical variables were described using absolute and relative frequencies and risk factors for mortality using Cox regression, with a confidence interval of 95%.

RESULTS

The main clinical indicators of COVID-19 patients were dyspnea, fever, fatigue, cough, among others, and the Nursing Diagnoses at higher risk of mortality were Ineffective protection, Ineffective tissue perfusion, Contamination, Ineffective Breathing Pattern, Impaired spontaneous ventilation, Acute confusion, Frailty syndrome, Obesity, and Decreased cardiac output. It is worth mentioning that there was little information about the diagnoses of Domains 9, 10, and 12.

CONCLUSION

This research infers the need to monitor the clinical indicators dyspnea, fever, fatigue, cough, among others, and the Nursing Diagnoses with the highest risk of mortality Ineffective protection, Ineffective tissue perfusion, Contamination, Ineffective Breathing Pattern, Impaired spontaneous ventilation in critically ill patients.

Indicadores clínicos, diagnósticos de enfermagem e risco de mortalidade em pacientes críticos com COVID-19: coorte retrospectiva

RESUMO Objetivo: Identificar os indicadores clínicos e os diagnósticos de enfermagem com maior risco de mortalidade em pacientes críticos com COVID-19. Método: Coorte retrospectiva com a população de adultos e idosos com COVID-19 de uma Unidade de Terapia Intensiva. As variáveis categóricas foram descritas por frequências absoluta e relativa e os fatores de risco para mortalidade, pela regressão de Cox, com intervalo de confiança de 95%. Resultados: Os principais indicadores clínicos de pacientes com COVID-19 foram dispneia, febre, fadiga, tosse, entre outros, e os Diagnósticos de Enfermagem de maior risco de mortalidade: Proteção ineficaz; Perfusão tissular ineficaz; Contaminação; Padrão Respiratório Ineficaz; Ventilação espontânea prejudicada; Confusão aguda; Síndrome do idoso frágil; Obesidade e Débito cardíaco diminuído. Vale ressaltar que havia poucas informações sobre os diagnósticos dos Domínios 9, 10 e 12. Conclusão: Esta pesquisa infere a necessidade de vigiar os indicadores clínicos dispneia, febre, fadiga, tosse, entre outros e os Diagnósticos de Enfermagem de maior risco de mortalidade Proteção ineficaz; Perfusão tissular ineficaz; Contaminação; Padrão Respiratório Ineficaz; Ventilação espontânea prejudicada em pacientes críticos.