Literature DB >> 32114611

Intensive Care Nurses' Perceptions of Routine Dyspnea Assessment.

Kathy M Baker1, Natalia Sullivan Vragovic2, Robert B Banzett3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Dyspnea (breathing discomfort) is commonly experienced by critically ill patients and at this time is not routinely assessed and documented. Intensive care unit nurses at the study institution recently instituted routine assessment and documentation of dyspnea in all patients able to report using a numeric scale ranging from 0 to 10.
OBJECTIVE: To assess nurses' perceptions of the utility of routine dyspnea measurement, patients' comprehension of assessment questions, and the impact on nursing practice and to gather nurses' suggestions for improvement.
METHODS: Data were obtained from interviews with intensive care unit nurses in small focus groups and an anonymous online survey randomly distributed to nurses representing all intensive care units.
RESULTS: Intensive care unit nurses affirmed the importance of routine dyspnea assessment and documentation. Before implementing the measurement tool, nurses often assessed for breathing discomfort in patients by using observed signs. Most nurses agreed that routine assessment can be used to predict patients' outcomes and improve patient-centered care. Nurses found the assessment tool easy to use and reported that it did not interfere with workflow. Nurses felt that patients were able to provide meaningful ratings of dyspnea, similar to ratings of pain, and often used patients' ratings in conjunction with observed physical signs to optimize patient care.
CONCLUSION: Our study shows that nurses understand the importance of routine dyspnea assessment and that the addition of a simple patient report scale can improve care delivery and does not add to the burden of work-flow. ©2020 American Association of Critical-Care Nurses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32114611     DOI: 10.4037/ajcc2020711

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Crit Care        ISSN: 1062-3264            Impact factor:   2.228


  2 in total

Review 1.  Perceived benefits and limitations of using patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice with individual patients: a systematic review of qualitative studies.

Authors:  Rachel Campbell; Angela Ju; Madeleine T King; Claudia Rutherford
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2021-09-27       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Translation, reliability, and validity of Japanese version of the Respiratory Distress Observation Scale.

Authors:  Hideaki Sakuramoto; Chie Hatozaki; Takeshi Unoki; Gen Aikawa; Shunsuke Kobayashi; Saiko Okamoto; Shinichi Shimomura; Ayako Kawasaki; Miwako Fukui
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-08-11       Impact factor: 3.240

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.