Background: Mechanically ventilated patients are at risk of developing inspiratory muscle weakness (IMW), which is associated with failure to wean and poor outcomes. Inspiratory muscle training (IMT) is a recommended intervention during and after extubation but has not been widely adopted in Dutch intensive care units (ICUs). Objectives: The objective of this study was to explore the potential, barriers, and facilitators for implementing IMT as treatment modality for mechanically ventilated patients. Methods: This mixed-method, proof-of-concept study was conducted in a large academic hospital in the Netherlands. An evidence-based protocol for assessing IMW and training was applied to patients ventilated for ≥24 h in the ICU during an 8-month period in 2021. Quantitative data on completed measurements and interventions during and after ICU-stay were collected retrospectively and were analysed descriptively. Qualitative data were collected through semistructured interviews with physiotherapists executing the new protocol. Interview data were transcribed and thematically analysed. Findings: Of the 301 screened patients, 11.6% (n = 35) met the inclusion criteria. Measurements were possible in 94.3% of the participants, and IMW was found in 78.8% of the participants. Ninety-six percent started training in the ICU, and 88.5% continued training after transfer to the ward. Follow-up measurements were achieved in 73.1% of the patients with respiratory muscle weakness. Twelve therapists were interviewed, of whom 41.7% regularly worked in the ICU. When exploring reasons for protocol deviation, three themes emerged: “professional barriers”, “external factors”, and “patient barriers”. Conclusions: Implementation of measurements of and interventions for IMW showed to be challenging in this single centre study. Clinicians' willingness to change their handling was related to beliefs regarding usefulness, effectiveness, and availability of time and material. We recommend that hospitals aiming to implement IMT during or after ventilator weaning consider these professional and organisational barriers for implementation of novel, evidence-based interventions into daily clinical practice.
MULTIFILE
Background: The increasing numbers of surgeries involving high risk, multi-morbid patients, coupled with inconsistencies in the practice of perioperative surgical wound care, increases patients’ risk of surgical site infection and other wound complications. Objectives: To synthesise and evaluate the recommendations for nursing practice and research from published systematic reviews in the Cochrane Library on nurse-led pre-operative prophylaxis and post-operative surgical wound care interventions used or initiated by nurses. Design: Meta-review, guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Data sources: The Cochrane Library database. Review methods: All Cochrane Systematic Reviews were eligible. Two reviewers independently selected the reviews and extracted data. One reviewer appraised the methodological quality of the included reviews using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) checklist. A second reviewer independently verified these appraisals. The review protocol was registered with the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. Results: Twenty-two Cochrane reviews met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 11 reviews focused on pre-operative interventions to prevent infection, while 12 focused on post-operative interventions (one review assessed both pre-and post-operative interventions). Across all reviews, 14 (63.6%) made at least one recommendation to undertake a specific practice, while two reviews (9.1%) made at least one specific recommendation not to undertake a practice. In relation to recommendations for further research, insufficient sample size was the most predominant methodological issue (12/22) identified across reviews. Conclusions: The limited number of recommendations for pre- and post-operative interventions reflects the paucity of high-quality evidence, suggesting a need for rigorous trials to address these evidence gaps in fundamentals of nursing care.
MULTIFILE
Background: The increasing numbers of surgeries involving high risk, multi-morbid patients, coupled with inconsistencies in the practice of perioperative surgical wound care, increases patients’ risk of surgical site infection and other wound complications. Objectives: To synthesise and evaluate the recommendations for nursing practice and research from published systematic reviews in the Cochrane Library on nurse-led preoperative prophylaxis and postoperative surgical wound care interventions used or initiated by nurses. Design: Meta-review, guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data sources: The Cochrane Library database. Review methods: All Cochrane Systematic Reviews were eligible. Two reviewers independently selected the reviews and extracted data. One reviewer appraised the methodological quality of the included reviews using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 checklist. A second reviewer independently verified these appraisals. The review protocol was registered with the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. Results: Twenty-two Cochrane reviews met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 11 reviews focused on preoperative interventions to prevent infection, while 12 focused on postoperative interventions (one review assessed both pre-postoperative interventions). Across all reviews, 14 (63.6%) made at least one recommendation to undertake a specific practice, while two reviews (9.1%) made at least one specific recommendation not to undertake a practice. In relation to recommendations for further research, insufficient sample size was the most predominant methodological issue (12/22) identified across reviews. Conclusions: The limited number of recommendations for pre-and-postoperative interventions reflects the paucity of high-quality evidence, suggesting a need for rigorous trials to address these evidence gaps in fundamentals of nursing care.
Bij de huidaandoeningen acne en rosacea komen ontstekingen van de huid voor. Patiënten krijgen dan vaak antibiotica voorgeschreven. Bacteriën kunnen uiteindelijk resistent worden tegen deze middelen. Met de AROSA-studie willen we het gebruik van antibiotica verminderen.Doel We willen inzicht krijgen in de rol die de huidbacterie Staphylococcus aureus speelt bij acne en rosacea. Daarnaast onderzoeken we of endolysine-therapie de klachten bij acne en rosacea kan verminderen. We hopen dat daardoor een gerichtere diagnose en behandeling mogelijk is en we daarmee het gebruik van antibiotica verminderen. Resultaten Dit onderzoek loopt nog. Na afronding vind je hier een samenvatting van de resultaten. Looptijd 01 maart 2018 - 31 december 2020 Aanpak We onderzoeken een veelbelovende therapie op basis van endolysines. De huidbacterie Staphylococcus aureus kan huidklachten bij acne en rosacea verergeren. De therapie pakt specifiek deze bacterie aan en wekt geen resistentie op. Hogeschool Utrecht, opleiding Huidtherapie heeft meegewerkt aan een wetenschappelijke documentaire over antibiotica-resistentie. Deze resistentie is een groeiend probleem, ook bij de huidaandoeningen acne en rosacea. In de documentaire is te zien hoe een behandeling op basis van endolysines mogelijk kan worden ingezet bij de behandeling van huidaandoeningen. Bekijk de documentaire. Heb je interesse of vragen? Mail naar polikliniekhuidtherapie@hu.nl
