Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Clin Infect Pract ; 19: 100228, 2023 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37206594

RESUMO

Background: The first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic in early 2020 required a rapid roll-out of infection prevention and control (IPC) training for healthcare workers (HCW), including use of appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE). Education about respiratory droplet and aerosol transmission was of paramount importance to ensure safe working practices and improve confidence. Methods: A joint working group of Infectious Diseases and IPC staff developed a 'train the trainers' programme, to be rapidly deployed over a three-week period. This model utilised a snowballing approach, training selected staff with the intention that they would train their teams, facilitating swift cascading of information. Targeted invitations prompted staff from diverse departments of the hospital to attend. Pre- and post-session questionnaires evaluated staff confidence with regard to appropriate PPE use. Results: The programme trained 130 HCW over a three week period, was well received and led to increased confidence with PPE use amongst staff. Real-time evaluation ensured content could be adapted to the specific needs of HCW involved. We highlight perceived gaps in training despite existing and enhanced training structures. Conclusion: Provision of face-to-face training in transmission-based precautions, including PPE use, is required to maintain confidence in safe and appropriate IPC amongst hospital staff. We highlight the importance of including non-clinical staff in PPE educational programmes, recognising that these roles are vital for patient care and are frequently patient-facing. We recommend adopting the train the trainers model to facilitate rapid dissemination of education, with interactive multidisciplinary training in future outbreaks to improve HCW confidence and effective IPC.

2.
BMJ Open Qual ; 11(3)2022 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36100293

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 management guidelines are constantly evolving, making them difficult to implement practically. Ronapreve was a neutralising monoclonal antibody introduced into UK COVID-19 guidelines in 2021. It reduces mortality in seronegative patients infected with non-omicron variants. Antibody testing on admission is therefore vital in ensuring patients could be considered for Ronapreve as inpatients. LOCAL PROBLEM: We found that on our COVID-19 ward, 31.4% of patients were not having anti-S tests despite fulfilling the other criteria to be eligible for Ronapreve. This was identified as an important target to improve; by not requesting anti-S tests, we were forgoing the opportunity to use an intervention that could improve outcomes. METHODS: We analysed patient records for patients with COVID-19 admitted to our ward over 4 months to observe if awareness of the need to request anti-S increased through conducting plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles. INTERVENTIONS: Our first intervention was an multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussion at our departmental audit meeting highlighting our baseline findings and the importance of anti-S requesting. Our second intervention was to hang printed posters in both the doctors' room and the ward as a visual reminder to staff. Our final intervention was trust-wide communications of updated local COVID-19 guidance that included instructions for anti-S requesting on admission. RESULTS: Our baseline data showed that only 68.6% of patients with symptomatic COVID-19 were having anti-S antibody tests requested. This increased to 95.0% following our three interventions. There was also a reduction in the amount of anti-S requests being 'added on', from 57.1% to 15.8%. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 guidelines are constantly evolving and require interventions that can be quickly and easily implemented to improve adherence. Sustained reminders through different approaches allowed a continued increase in requesting. This agrees with research that suggests a mixture of educational sessions and visual reminders of guidelines increase their application in clinical practice.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Melhoria de Qualidade , Humanos , Pacientes Internados
3.
Emerg Med J ; 35(6): 345-349, 2018 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29467173

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The third international consensus definition for sepsis recommended use of a new prognostic tool, the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), based on its ability to predict inhospital mortality and prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) stay in patients with suspected infection. While several studies have compared the prognostic accuracy of qSOFA to the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria in suspected sepsis, few have compared qSOFA and SIRS to the widely used National Early Warning Score (NEWS). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study carried out in a UK tertiary centre. The study population comprised emergency admissions in whom sepsis was suspected and treated. The accuracy for predicting inhospital mortality and ICU admission was calculated and compared for qSOFA, SIRS and NEWS. RESULTS: Among 1818 patients, 53 were admitted to ICU (3%) and 265 died in hospital (15%). For predicting inhospital mortality, the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve for NEWS (0.65, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.68) was similar to qSOFA (0.62, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.66) (test for difference, P=0.18) and superior to SIRS (P<0.001), which was not predictive. The sensitivity of NEWS≥5 (74%, 95% CI 68% to 79%) was similar to SIRS≥2 (80%, 95% CI 74% to 84%) and higher than qSOFA≥2 (37%, 95% CI 31% to 43%). The specificity of NEWS≥5 (43%, 95% CI 41% to 46%) was higher than SIRS≥2 (21%, 95% CI 19% to 23%) and lower than qSOFA≥2 (79%, 95% CI 77% to 81%). The negative predictive value was 88% (86%-90%) for qSOFA, 86% (82%-89%) for SIRS and 91% (88%-93%) for NEWS. Results were similar for the secondary outcome of ICU admission. CONCLUSION: NEWS has equivalent or superior value for most test characteristics relative to SIRS and qSOFA, calling into question the rationale of adopting qSOFA in institutions where NEWS is already in use.


Assuntos
Técnicas de Apoio para a Decisão , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva/estatística & dados numéricos , Sepse/diagnóstico , Adulto , Área Sob a Curva , Estudos de Coortes , Feminino , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva/organização & administração , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Escores de Disfunção Orgânica , Prognóstico , Curva ROC , Estudos Retrospectivos , Sepse/epidemiologia , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Reino Unido/epidemiologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA