[Development and implementation of primary nursing in the intensive care unit: evaluation in mixed-methods design.] / Entwicklung und Implementierung von Prozessverantwortlicher Pflege auf der Intensivstation.

Development and implementation of primary nursing in the intensive care unit: evaluation in mixed-methods design. Abstract:Background: In a university hospital, the development and implementation of Primary Nursing (Prozessverantwortliche Pflege, PP) in a pilot intensive care unit was initiated. To develop the roles of nurses with and without process responsibility a working group PP was founded while taking into account the skill-grade mix. Aim: The working group aimed to develop the roles of process-responsible nurses (PP) and nurses (P), as well as to plan and implement the implementation process. Methods: Development and piloting steps were taken based on the recommendations of the Medical Research Council. At three measurement points, the instrument for recording nursing systems (IzEP©) was used quantitatively and a focus group interview, as well as a ward process analysis, were used qualitatively in t0 (as-is analysis before development and piloting), t1 (6 months after implementation) and t2 (12 months after implementation). Results: PP mainly take over the care process's design and control. The IzEP© analysis showed that room care was practiced in t0 with 50.0%. The values increased towards PP from 74.0% in t1 to 83.5% in t2. Qualitatively obtained data supported these results and showed further optimization potential for practice. Conclusions: The results prove the successful implementation of PP in practice. For the development and implementation of new nursing roles, the involvement of the affected nurses is mandatory.

Reliable acoustic measurements in children between 5;0 and 9;11 years: Gender, age, height and weight effects on fundamental frequency, jitter and shimmer in phonations without and with controlled voice SPL.

BACKGROUND: Current pediatric voice assessment guidelines include instrumental measurements of fundamental frequency (F0) and the perturbation indices jitter and shimmer. In children below 10 years, gender, age, height and weight effects on these parameters have been inconsistently characterized. Recent research in healthy children showed, that differences in habitual speaking voice intensity (voice SPL) under the usual assessment procedure significantly affect jitter and shimmer. These effects were reduced in phonations with controlled voice SPL >80dBA. Reliable measurement methods and description of physiologic influencing factors are essential to identify pathologic voices. OBJECTIVE: This cross-sectional single cohort study investigates in children between 5;0 and 9;11 years how gender, age, height and weight affect voice F0, jitter and shimmer in phonations at individually "medium" voice intensity (modeling the usual clinical practice) and with controlled voice SPL >80dBA. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: 68 vocally healthy children (39 f/29 m) aged 5;0-9;11 years provided 3 prolonged phonations of/a/at individually "medium" and controlled voice intensity at ">80dBA" (visual feedback, 10cm distance). F0 (Hz), jitter (%), shimmer (%) and voice SPL (dBA) were determined with PRAAT. Gender, age, height and weight effects without and with controlled voice SPL were assessed by descriptive statistics, Analysis of Variance and Linear Mixed Models. RESULTS: F0 (Hz), jitter (%), shimmer (%) and voice SPL (dBA) were significantly different in medium voice compared to >80dBA (p<0.01). In medium phonations girls had a higher F0 than boys (girls: 276.7(50.7), boys: 261.5(33.7)), but with >80dBA this difference was only minimal (girls: 328.9(52.2), boys 327.9(51.2)). Mean jitter (0.27(0.10)) and shimmer (4.34(1.68)) were smaller and showed less spread (jitter: 0.5(0.26); shimmer: 9.47(3.47)) with >80dBA. Gender, age, height and weight had no significant effects on F0, jitter, shimmer and voice SPL in both phonation types (p-range=0.42-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Neither without nor with controlled voice SPL there were systematic gender, age, height or weight effects on voice F0, jitter and shimmer. Gender related F0 discrepancies were equalized in phonations with >80dBA. In children below 10 years gender related acoustic voice differences may be mainly linked to behavior, which should be considered in future works regarding physiologic voice development.

Clinical relevance of speaking voice intensity effects on acoustic jitter and shimmer in children between 5;0 and 9;11 years.

BACKGROUND: Current voice assessment recommendations for dysphonic children comprise instrumental acoustic measurements of the perturbation parameters jitter and shimmer. In healthy adults and children changes in speaking voice sound pressure level (voice SPL) have significant confounding effects on both parameters. In adults these effects were considerably reduced in phonations with controlled voice SPL >80dBA (10cm distance). However, it is unclear if these findings apply to children and if children are able to control for their own voice intensity. OBJECTIVE: This cross-sectional single cohort study investigates voice SPL effects on jitter and shimmer in children between 5;0 and 9;11 years phonating at individually "medium" (modeling "comfortable" loudness of the usual clinical protocol), "soft" and "loud" voice and a prescribed intensity level of ">80dBA" (10cm distance, with visual control). Further both their ability to phonate at a prescribed voice intensity level and the effect on SPL related confounding effects were studied. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A total of 68 healthy children (39 f/29m) aged 5;0 to 9;11 years were included. All phonated the vowel/a/for 5s, three times at four defined voice intensity levels (soft/medium/loud/>80dBA) each. Jitter (%), shimmer (%) and voice SPL (dBA) were determined using PRAAT. Voice intensity level effects were assessed by descriptive statistics, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Linear Mixed Models (LMM). RESULTS: There were significant differences for jitter and shimmer between all voice tasks (p<.01). Jitter and shimmer were lowest and showed the smallest spread in controlled phonations ">80dBA". 19 children below 7;0 years could not perform the voice tasks and were excluded from the study. CONCLUSIONS: This practical study demonstrated a significant effect of voice loudness and task on jitter and shimmer in children. Since the observed confounding effects were large compared to treatment effects, jitter and shimmer may not be meaningful without adequate control of voice SPL. In phonations at ">80dBA" (10cm distance) voice SPL related effects were considerably reduced. However, this assessment protocol was suitable only for children above 7;0 years. Application of this task to future studies of dysphonic children may yield clinically valuable information.