Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Pediatric invasive device utility and harm: a multi-site point prevalence survey.
Takashima, Mari; Gibson, Victoria; Borello, Eloise; Galluzzo, Lily; Gill, Fenella J; Kinney, Sharon; Newall, Fiona; Ullman, Amanda J.
Afiliación
  • Takashima M; School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, Australia. m.takashima@uq.edu.au.
  • Gibson V; Queensland Children's Hospital, Children's Health Queensland Hospital and Health Service, South Brisbane, QLD, Australia. m.takashima@uq.edu.au.
  • Borello E; School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, Australia.
  • Galluzzo L; Queensland Children's Hospital, Children's Health Queensland Hospital and Health Service, South Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
  • Gill FJ; Nursing Research Department, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
  • Kinney S; School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, Australia.
  • Newall F; Perth Children's Hospital, Child and Adolescent Health Service, Perth, WA, Australia.
  • Ullman AJ; School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.
Pediatr Res ; 2024 Jan 11.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38200324
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND

AIMS:

Invasive devices are widely used in healthcare settings; however, pediatric patients are especially vulnerable to invasive device-associated harm. This study aimed to explore invasive device utility, prevalence, harm, and clinical practice across three Australian pediatric tertiary hospitals.

METHODS:

In 2022-2023, a multi-center, observational, rolling-point-prevalence survey was conducted. Fifty-per-cent of inpatients were systemically sampled by random allocation. Patients with devices were then followed for up to 3-days for device-related complications/failures and management/removal characteristics.

RESULTS:

Of the 285 patients audited, 78.2% had an invasive device (n = 412 devices), with a median of 1 device-per-patient (interquartile range 1-2), with a maximum of 13 devices-per-patient. Over half of devices were vascular access devices (n = 223; 54.1%), followed by gastrointestinal devices (n = 112; 27.2%). The point-prevalence of all device complications on Day 0 was 10.7% (44/412 devices) and period-prevalence throughout the audit period was 27.7% (114/412 devices). The period-prevalence of device failure was 13.4% (55/412 devices).

CONCLUSIONS:

The study highlighted a high prevalence of invasive devices among hospitalized patients. One-in-ten devices failed during the audit period. These findings underscore the need for vigilant monitoring and improved strategies to minimize complications and enhance the safety of invasive devices in pediatric hospital settings. IMPACT A high prevalence of invasive devices among hospitalized patients was reported. Of the 285 patients audited, almost 80% had an invasive device (total 412 devices), with a median of 1 device-per-patient and a maximum of 13 devices-per-patient. The most common devices used in pediatric healthcare are vascular access devices (n = 223; 54.1%), however, 16% (n = 36) of these devices failed, and one-third had complications. The point prevalence of all device complications at day 0 was 10.7% (44 out of 412 devices), with a period prevalence of 27.7% (114 out of 412 devices) throughout the audit period.

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Prevalence_studies / Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Revista: Pediatr Res Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Australia

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Prevalence_studies / Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Revista: Pediatr Res Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Australia
...