Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Implementation of ultrasound after central venous catheter insertion: A qualitative study in early adopters.
Ablordeppey, Enyo A; Keating, Shannon M; Brown, Katherine M; Theodoro, Daniel L; Griffey, Richard T; James, Aimee S.
Afiliación
  • Ablordeppey EA; Department of Anesthesiology, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
  • Keating SM; Department of Emergency Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
  • Brown KM; Department of Anesthesiology, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
  • Theodoro DL; Department of Surgery, Division of Public Health Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
  • Griffey RT; Department of Emergency Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
  • James AS; Department of Emergency Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
J Vasc Access ; 24(5): 879-888, 2023 Sep.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34763555
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

The adoption rate of point of care ultrasound (POCUS) for the confirmation of central venous catheter (CVC) positioning and exclusion of post procedure pneumothorax is low despite advantages in workflow compared to traditional chest X-ray (CXR). To explore why, we convened focus groups to address barriers and facilitators of implementation for POCUS guided CVC confirmation and de-implementation of post-procedure CXR.

METHODS:

We conducted focus groups with emergency medicine and critical care providers to discuss current practices in POCUS for CVC confirmation. The semi-structured focus group interview guide was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We performed qualitative content analysis of the resulting transcripts using a consensual qualitative research approach (NVivo software), aiming to identify priority categories that describe the barriers and facilitators of POCUS guided CVC confirmation.

RESULTS:

The coding dictionary of barriers and facilitators consisted of 21 codes from the focus group discussions. Our qualitative analysis revealed that 12 codes emerged spontaneously (inductively) within the focus group discussions and aligned directly to CFIR constructs. Common barriers included provider influences (e.g. knowledge and beliefs about POCUS for CVC confirmation), external network (e.g. societal guidelines, ancillary staff, and consultants), and inertia (habit or reflexive processes). Common facilitators included ultrasound protocol advantage and champions. Time and provider outcomes (cognitive offload, ownership, and independence) emerged as early barriers but late facilitators.

CONCLUSION:

Our qualitative analysis demonstrates real and perceived barriers against implementation of POCUS for CVC position confirmation and pneumothorax exclusion. Our findings discovered organizational and personal constructs that will inform development of multifaceted strategies toward implementation of POCUS after CVC insertion.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neumotórax / Cateterismo Venoso Central / Catéteres Venosos Centrales Tipo de estudio: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Vasc Access Asunto de la revista: ANGIOLOGIA Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neumotórax / Cateterismo Venoso Central / Catéteres Venosos Centrales Tipo de estudio: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Vasc Access Asunto de la revista: ANGIOLOGIA Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos