1
|
Graham ND, Graham ID, Vanderspank-Wright B, Nadalin Penno L, Fergusson DA, Squires JE. Factors influencing nurses' use of sedation interruptions in a critical care unit: a descriptive qualitative study. JBI Evid Implement 2024:02205615-990000000-00085. [PMID: 38533695 DOI: 10.1097/xeb.0000000000000415] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/28/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS This study examined critical care nurses', physicians', and allied health professionals' perceptions of factors that support, inhibit, or limit the use of sedation interruption (SI) to improve the use of this integral component of care for mechanically ventilated patients. METHOD We conducted a theory-based, descriptive qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with critical care registered nurses, respiratory therapists, a pharmacist, and a physician in a hospital in Ontario, Canada. The interview guide and analysis were informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework and transcripts were analyzed using content analysis. RESULTS We identified 9 facilitators and 20 barriers to SI use by nurses. Facilitators included the innovation (importance of protocols) and potential adopters (comfort with the skill). The barriers were the potential adopters' (nurses) knowledge gaps regarding the performance and goal of SI and the practice environment (lack of time, availability of extra staff, and lack of multidisciplinary rounds). CONCLUSION This study identified facilitators and barriers to SI for mechanically ventilated patients. Implementation efforts must address barriers associated with nurses, the environment, and contextual factors. A team-based approach is essential, as the absence of interprofessional rounds is a significant barrier to the appropriate use or non-use of SI. Future research can focus on the indications, contraindications, and goals of SI, emphasizing a shared appreciation for these factors across disciplines. Nursing capacity to manage a patient waking up from sedation is necessary for point-of-care adherence; future research should focus on the best ways to do so. Implementation study designs should use theory and evidence-based determinants of SI to bridge the evidence-to-practice gap. SPANISH ABSTRACT http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A178.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicole D Graham
- Faculty of Environmental and Health Sciences, Canadore College, North Bay, ON, Canada
| | - Ian D Graham
- Faculty of Environmental and Health Sciences, Canadore College, North Bay, ON, Canada
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada
- Faculty of Medicine, School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | | | - Letitia Nadalin Penno
- Faculty of Environmental and Health Sciences, Canadore College, North Bay, ON, Canada
| | - Dean A Fergusson
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Janet E Squires
- Faculty of Environmental and Health Sciences, Canadore College, North Bay, ON, Canada
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Graham ND, Graham ID, Vanderspank-Wright B, Varin MD, Nadalin Penno L, Fergusson DA, Squires JE. A systematic review and critical appraisal of guidelines and their recommendations for sedation interruptions in adult mechanically ventilated patients. Aust Crit Care 2023; 36:889-901. [PMID: 36522246 DOI: 10.1016/j.aucc.2022.10.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2022] [Revised: 10/03/2022] [Accepted: 10/09/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The objectives of the review were to (i) assess the methodological quality of all accessible and published guidelines and care bundles that offer a recommendation related to sedation interruptions, using the AGREE-II instrument, to (ii) determine what is the recommended best practice for sedation interruptions from the available guidelines, and then to have (iii) a closer inspection of the overall credibility and applicability of the recommendations using the AGREE-REX instrument. This review will benefit the outcomes of critically ill patients and the multidisciplinary team responsible for the care of mechanically ventilated adults with continuous medication infusions by providing a synthesis of the recommended action(s), actor(s), contextual information, target(s), and timing related to sedation interruptions from current best practice. REVIEW METHOD USED We conducted a systematic review. DATA SOURCES We applied a peer-reviewed search strategy to four electronic databases from 2010 to November 2021-MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews-and included grey literature. REVIEW METHOD Findings are reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses checklist. We assessed overall quality using the validated Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II and AGREE Recommendation Excellence tools. RESULTS We identified 11 clinical practice guidelines and care bundles comprising 15 recommendations related to sedation interruption. There are three key findings: (i) deficiencies exist with the methodological quality of included guidelines, (ii) sedation interruption is recommended practice for the care of adult mechanically ventilated patients, and (iii) the current evidence is of low quality, which impacts overall credibility and applicability of the recommendations. CONCLUSIONS Sedation interruptions are currently best practice for adult mechanically ventilated patients; however, the available guidelines and recommendations have several deficiencies. Future research is needed to further understand the role of the nurse and other actors to enact this practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicole D Graham
- University of Ottawa, Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Nursing, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, K1H 8M5, Canada.
| | - Ian D Graham
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 501 Smyth Road, P.O. Box 711, Ottawa ON, K1H 8L6, Canada; Faculty of Medicine, School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada; University of Ottawa, Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Nursing, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, K1H 8M5, Canada.
| | - Brandi Vanderspank-Wright
- University of Ottawa, Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Nursing, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, K1H 8M5, Canada.
| | - Melissa Demery Varin
- University of Ottawa, Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Nursing, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, K1H 8M5, Canada.
| | - Letitia Nadalin Penno
- University of Ottawa, Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Nursing, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, K1H 8M5, Canada.
| | - Dean A Fergusson
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 501 Smyth Road, P.O. Box 711, Ottawa ON, K1H 8L6, Canada; Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 501 Smyth Road, P.O. Box 711, Ottawa ON, K1H 8L6, Canada.
| | - Janet E Squires
- University of Ottawa, Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Nursing, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, K1H 8M5, Canada; Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 501 Smyth Road, P.O. Box 711, Ottawa ON, K1H 8L6, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|