Mobility level and factors affecting mobility status in hospitalized patients admitted in single-occupancy patient rooms.

BACKGROUND: Although stimulating patients' mobility is considered a component of fundamental nursing care, approximately 35% of hospitalized patients experience functional decline during or after hospital admission. The aim of this study is to assess mobility level and to identify factors affecting mobility status in hospitalized patients admitted in single-occupancy patient rooms (SPRs) on general wards. METHODS: Mobility level was quantified with the Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility Scale (JH-HLM) and EQ-5D-3L. GENEActiv accelerometer data over 24 h were collected in a subset of patients. Data were analyzed using generalized ordinal logistic regression analysis. The STROBE reporting checklist was applied. RESULTS: Wearing pajamas during daytime, having pain, admission in an isolation room, and wearing three or more medical equipment were negatively associated with mobilization level. More than half of patients (58.9%) who were able to mobilize according to the EQ-5D-3L did not achieve the highest possible level of mobility according to the JH-HLM. The subset of patients that wore an accelerometer spent most of the day in sedentary behavior (median 88.1%, IQR 85.9-93.6). The median total daily step count was 1326 (range 22-5362). CONCLUSION: We found that the majority of participating hospitalized patients staying in single-occupancy patient rooms were able to mobilize. It appeared, however, that most of the patients who are physically capable of walking, do not reach the highest possible level of mobility according to the JH-HLM scale. Nurses should take their responsibility to ensure that patients achieve the highest possible level of mobility.

Implementation of a nursing oral health care protocol in a university teaching hospital: A cluster-randomized stepped-wedge design.

INTRODUCTION: Providing oral care is an essential part of basic nursing care but receives little priority in daily practice, with a risk of adverse events. Also, nurses report many barriers to adequate provision of oral care, such as time restraints, insufficient materials, fear of causing pain, lack of knowledge and a negative attitude towards providing oral care. METHODS: We performed a cluster-randomized, stepped-wedge study to explore the effect of the the implementation of a new nursing evidence-based oral care protocol on nurses' knowledge, attitude and protocol adherence. The study population included both nursing students, graduated nurses and patients in selected wards. The implementation strategy included oral and written information, instruction videos and reminders. Nurses' knowledge and attitude towards oral care were assessed at baseline and after the implementation of the protocol with a validated 47-item questionnaire with a score range of 0-100. Secondarily, nurses' protocol adherence to teeth brushing, measured in Activities of Daily Living (ADL) dependent patients, was evaluated. The Standards for Reporting Implementation Studies (StaRI) Statement was used. RESULTS: At baseline, the questionnaire was completed by 226 nurses; after implementation by 283. Knowledge had significantly improved from 68.8 to 72.3. Nurses' attitude improved not significantly. Protocol adherence was assessed in 73 ADL-dependent patients at baseline, in 51 after implementation. Adherence to teeth brushing significantly decreased in patients with permanent teeth. Also, adherence to both teeth brushing and usage of soap decreased in patients with (partial) dentures. CONCLUSION: Nurses' knowledge and attitude of oral care increased somewhat after the implementation of a new nursing evidence-based protocol. After implementation, there was an unexplained decreased adherence to oral care in ADL-dependent patients.

Hospitalized Patients' Sleep Quality Compared Between Multioccupancy Rooms and Single-Patient Rooms.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate patients' sleep quality in a former hospital with two-and four-bedded rooms compared to a new hospital that incorporated evidence-based design features, including exclusively single-patient rooms (SPRs). BACKGROUND: Hospitalized patients often report poor sleep quality due to both patient-related factors and hospital environmental factors. It is unclear if staying in an SPR in a hospital designed as a healing environment is associated with better sleep quality. METHODS: In a before-after study, sleep quality, duration, and efficiency over 72 hr were measured with a sleep diary, GENEActiv accelerometer, and the Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ) with scores ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores reflecting better sleep. Participants were either staying alone in the former hospital with two-and four-bedded rooms (Group 1), sharing a room with one to three fellow patients (Group 2), or staying alone in a newly designed hospital with 100% SPRs (Group 3). RESULTS: We included 17 patients in Group 1, 32 patients in Group 2, and 56 patients in Group 3. Univariable linear mixed model analysis, controlling for night number, revealed that the RCSQ total score was lowest in Group 2 compared to the other two groups. In the multivariable analysis, the RCSQ score was also the lowest in Group 2, with a significant effect from covariate "use of night medication." CONCLUSION: Self-reported sleep quality of hospitalized patients in a hospital with 100% SPRs designed as a healing environment was slightly better than that of patients staying in multioccupancy rooms with fellow patients.

Quality of life of locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients after FOLFIRINOX treatment.

BACKGROUND: Quality of life in cancer patients might be affected by chemotherapy-induced toxicity. Especially in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), with a short life expectancy, fear of poor quality of life is often a reason for both patients and medical oncologists to refrain from further treatment. In this study, we investigated quality of life (QoL), pain, sleep, and activity levels in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) patients after FOLFIRINOX treatment. METHODS: A total of 41 LAPC patients with stable disease or partial response were included after completion of at least four cycles of FOLFIRINOX. QoL was measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and NRS pain scores. Patients completed the Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ) for five consecutive nights and wore a GENEActiv tri-axial accelerometer (Actiwatch) for 7 days, registering sleep duration, efficiency, and activity. RESULTS: Mean EORTC QLQ-C30 score for global health status was 78.3 (± 17.3), higher than reference values for cancer patients (P < 0.001) and general population (P = 0.045). LAPC patients reported few disease-related symptoms. Two patients (5%) reported pain scores > 3. Mean sleep duration was 8 h/night (± 1.2 h) and sleep efficiency 70% (± 9%) with high patient-reported quality of sleep (mean RCSQ score 72.0 ± 11.4). Mean duration of moderate-vigorous activity was 37 min/week (± 103 min/week). CONCLUSIONS: QoL is very good in most LAPC patients with disease control after FOLFIRINOX, measured with validated questionnaires and Actiwatch registration. The fear of clinical deterioration after FOLFIRINOX is not substantiated by this study and should not be a reason to refrain from treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch trial register NL7578.

Effect of the use of an antiseptic barrier cap on the rates of central line-associated bloodstream infections in neonatal and pediatric intensive care.

BACKGROUND: The use of antiseptic barrier caps reduced the occurrence of central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) in adult intensive care settings. We assessed the effect of the use of antiseptic barrier caps on the incidence of CLABSI in infants and children and evaluated the implementation process. METHODS: We performed a mixed-method, prospective, observational before-after study. The CLABSI rate was documented during the "scrub the hub method" and the antiseptic barrier cap phase. Main outcomes were the number of CLABSIs per 1,000 catheter days (assessed with a Poisson regression analysis) and nurses' adherence to antiseptic barrier cap protocol. RESULTS: In total, 2,248 patients were included. The rate of CLABSIs per 1,000 catheter days declined from 3.15 to 2.35, resulting in an overall incidence reduction of 22% (95% confidence interval, -34%, 55%; P = .368). Nurses' adherence to the antiseptic barrier cap protocol was 95.2% and 89.0% for the neonatal intensive care unit and pediatric intensive care unit, respectively. DISCUSSION: The CLABSI reducing effect of the antiseptic barrier caps seems to be more prominent in the neonatal intensive care unit population compared with the pediatric intensive care unit population. CONCLUSIONS: The antiseptic barrier cap did not significantly reduce the CLABSI rates in this study.

Antiseptic barrier cap effective in reducing central line-associated bloodstream infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Microorganisms can intraluminally access a central venous catheter via the catheter hub. The catheter hub should be appropriately disinfected to prevent central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs). However, compliance with the time-consuming manual disinfection process is low. An alternative is the use of an antiseptic barrier cap, which cleans the catheter hub by continuous passive disinfection. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of antiseptic barrier cap use and manual disinfection on the incidence of CLABSIs. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We systematically searched Embase, Medline Ovid, Web-of-science, CINAHL EBSCO, Cochrane Library, PubMed Publisher and Google Scholar until May 10, 2016. The primary outcome, reduction in CLABSIs per 1000 catheter-days, expressed as an incidence rate ratio (IRR), was analyzed with a random effects meta-analysis. Studies were included if 1) conducted in a hospital setting, 2) used antiseptic barrier caps on hubs of central lines with access to the bloodstream and 3) reported the number of CLABSIs per 1000 catheter-days when using the barrier cap and when using manual disinfection. RESULTS: A total of 1537 articles were identified as potentially relevant and after exclusion of duplicates, 953 articles were screened based on title and abstract; 18 articles were read full text. Eventually, nine studies were included in the systematic review, and seven of these nine in the random effects meta-analysis. The pooled IRR showed that use of the antiseptic barrier cap was effective in reducing CLABSIs (IRR=0.59, 95% CI=0.45-0.77, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Use of an antiseptic barrier cap is associated with a lower incidence CLABSIs and is an intervention worth adding to central-line maintenance bundles.