Adherence of critical care nurses to endotracheal suctioning guidelines: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Endotracheal suctioning (ETS) is one of the most common invasive procedures performed by critical care nurses (CCNs) to remove accumulated pulmonary secretions, ensure airway patency for adequate ventilation and oxygenation as well as prevent atelectasis in intubated patients. OBJECTIVES: To assess the practice of CCNs in intensive care units (ICUs) before, during, and after performing the ETS procedure and identify factors affecting their practice. METHODS: A cross-sectional and non-participant observational design was conducted in the ICUs of four hospitals in Hodeida city, Yemen. The data were collected using a 25-item observational checklist in the period from May to August 2019. RESULTS: More than half (55%) of CCNs scored undesirable (< 50%) regarding their adherence to ETS practice guidelines while the rest scored moderate (50-75%), with none of showing desirable adherence (> 70%) to the guidelines. There was no significant association between gender, age, education level, or length of experience of CCNs in the ICUs and their practice during performance ETS procedures. However, training (p = 0.010) and receiving information about ETS (p = 0.028) significantly improved the CCNs' practice. CONCLUSION: Most CCNs at the ICUs of Hodeida hospitals do not adhere to evidence-based practice guidelines when performing ETS procedures, possibly resulting in numerous adverse effects and complications for patients. CCNs receiving information and training show better ETS practice than do their counterparts. Therefore, it is necessary to provide the nursing staff with clear guidelines, continuous education and monitoring to improve their practices.

A Multicenter Cross-sectional Questionnaire-based Study to Know the Practices and Strategies of Ventilatory Management of COVID-19 Patients among the Treating Physicians.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 has been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). Many of the COVID-19 patients develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and require ventilatory support based on their severity for which conventional strategies are being used along with few newer strategies. We conducted this multicenter survey to know the physician's current ventilation strategies adopted for the care of COVID-19 patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The survey was conducted after taking the ethical committee clearance. The web-based multicenter, cross-sectional questionnaire study was sent to physicians, who were involved in the management of COVID-19 patients. The questionnaire was segregated into three parts: part one consisted of general information and consent form, part two was concerned regarding demographic characteristics, and part three was concerned about their practices and strategies for ventilation of COVID-19 patients. RESULTS: A total of 223 responders replied for the questionnaire; 190 participated in the study saying that they are involved in the management of COVID-19 patients. The answers to the questionnaires were expressed as a percentage of total responses. 86% of the respondents said they have a designated intensive care unit (ICU) and 89% of the responders said they have an intubation/extubation protocol for suspect/confirmed COVID-19 patients. The responses of junior residents (JRs), senior residents (SRs), assistant professors/junior consultants, and professors/consultants were analyzed separately, and a few significant differences were observed. 39% of JRs were aware of prone ventilation as the most effective rescue ventilation strategy compared to 69% of consultants/professors. Extracorporeal membranous oxygenation (ECMO) strategy was also more significant in consultants/professors (40%) vs JRs (12%). The responders were also diverged based on medical college and corporate hospitals, and their responses were noted. Most commonly, responders in the corporate hospitals had a facility to ventilate COVID-19 patients in a negative pressure isolation facility compared to a nonnegative pressure room isolation facility in medical colleges. CONCLUSION: Most of the responders were practicing ventilation strategies in a standard manner. JRs need to undergo further training in a few aspects of the ventilatory management, and also, they need to update themselves with newer treatment modalities as they keep evolving. Medical colleges are providing at par facility compared to corporate hospitals except for few advance care facilities. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This study highlights the current practice of ventilatory management of COVID-19 patients, which is satisfactory. The survey can be used to develop study tools, to educate resident doctors, to further improve quality of care of critical COVID-19 patients. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Maddani SS, Deepa HC, Rao S, Chaudhuri S. A Multicenter Cross-sectional Questionnaire-based Study to know the Practices and Strategies of Ventilatory Management of COVID-19 Patients among the Treating Physicians. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(8):643-648.

Nurse-led intervention to improve oral mucosal health of intubated patients in the intensive care unit: A prospective study.

BACKGROUND: This prospective study aimed to explore the effectiveness of an oral care intervention with Tegaderm on the oral mucosal health of intubated patients. METHODS: A total of 70 intubated patients were included and randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups, clean water brushing teeth (n = 23), brushing teeth combined with mouthwash (BTM) (n = 23), and brushing teeth combined with mouthwash and Tegaderm (BTMT) (n = 24). The Oral Mucositis Assessment Scale (OMAS) was applied to evaluate the patient's oral mucosal health before and after oral care intervention. RESULTS: The BTMT group had lower OMAS scores in almost all regions of the oral cavity, compared to the brushing teeth and BTM groups. The general linear model for repeated measurement indicated the BTMT group had the lowest total OMAS scores from Day 2 to Day 4 after the initiation of baseline OMAS evaluation. Of the 3 intervention groups, the BTMT group had the shortest length of endotracheal intubation. The BTMT group had the lowest incidence rate of ventilator-associated pneumonia; however, no significant between-group differences were found. CONCLUSIONS: BTMT effectively reduced the decline in oral mucosal health that was caused by endotracheal intubation and shortened the length of endotracheal intubation.

Trends in endotracheal intubation for patients with COVID-19 by emergency physicians.

Emergency physicians perform endotracheal intubations for patients with COVID-19. However, the trends in the intubation for COVID-19 patients in terms of success rate, complications, personal protective equipment (PPE) information, barrier enclosure use, and its transition have not been established. We conducted a retrospective study of COVID-19 cases that required tracheal intubation at four hospitals in the Tokyo metropolitan area between January 2020 and August 2021. The overall intubation success rate, operator experience, and infection control methods were investigated. We then compared the early and late phases of the pandemic for a period of 8 months each. A total of 211 cases met the inclusion criteria, and 133 were eligible for analysis. The intubation success rate increased from 85% to 94% from early to late phase, although the percentage of intubations performed by emergency medicine residents increased significantly in the late phase (p = 0.03). The percentage of light PPE use significantly increased from 65% to 91% from early to late phase (p < 0.01), whereas the percentage of barrier enclosure use significantly decreased from 26% to 0% (p < 0.01). Furthermore, the infection prevention methods during intubation became more simplified from early to late phase.

Adherence to Evidence-Base Endotracheal Intubation Practice Patterns by Intensivists and Emergency Department Physicians.

BACKGROUND: Endotracheal intubation outside the operating room (OR) is mainly performed by intensive care (IC) physicians and emergency department (ED) physicians. We hypothesized that difference in practice patterns exists between these two groups of physicians. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on all endotracheal intubations that were performed out of OR over a fi ve year period at our health care facility. Practice patterns of IC and ED physicians were compared regarding use of (a) video laryngoscopy, (b) paralytic agents, (c) waveform capnography, and (d) use of larger size of endotracheal tube (internal diameter ≥ 8 mm). RESULTS: A total of 201 patients underwent out of OR intubations over a 5 year period. IC physicians used more often than ED physicians video laryngoscopy (67% vs. 49%; p = 0.008), waveform capnography (99% vs. 86%; p = 0.001) and larger size endotracheal tubes (95% vs. 60%; p < 0.001). Conversely, paralytic agents were used less frequently by IC than ED physicians (12% vs. 51%; p < 0.001). The success of fi rst intubation attempt was higher by IC than ED physicians (82% vs. 67%; p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: IC physicians more often adhered to currently considered preferable practices for endotracheal intubation than ED physicians in this single center retrospective study. Although larger scale studies are needed to unveil the effects of different practice patterns on short and long term outcomes, the present study identifi es opportunity to bridge practice gaps that could lead to improved outcomes.

Defining the learning curve of point-of-care ultrasound for confirming endotracheal tube placement by emergency physicians.

BACKGROUND: Unrecognized esophageal intubations are associated with significant patient morbidity and mortality. No single confirmatory device has been shown to be 100 % accurate at ruling out esophageal intubations in the emergency department. Recent studies have demonstrated that point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) may be a useful adjunct for confirming endotracheal tube placement; however, the amount of practice required to become proficient at this technique is unclear. The purpose of this study is to determine the amount of practice required by emergency physicians to become proficient at interpreting ultrasound video clips of esophageal and endotracheal intubations. METHODS: Emergency physicians and emergency medicine residents completed a baseline interpretation test followed by a 10 min online tutorial. They then interpreted POCUS clips of esophageal and endotracheal intubations in a randomly selected order. If an incorrect response was provided, the participant completed another practice session with feedback. This process continued until they correctly interpreted ten consecutive ultrasound clips. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data. RESULTS: Of the 87 eligible physicians, 66 (75.9 %) completed the study. The mean score on the baseline test was 42.9 % (SD 32.7 %). After the tutorial, 90.9 % (60/66) of the participants achieved proficiency after one practice attempt and 100 % achieved proficiency after two practice attempts. Six intubation ultrasound clips were misinterpreted, for a total error rate of 0.9 % (6/684). Overall, the participants had a sensitivity of 98.3 % (95 % CI 96.3-99.4 %) and specificity of 100 % (95 % CI 98.9-100 %) for detecting correct tube location. Scans were interpreted within an average of 4 s (SD 2.9 s) of the intubation. CONCLUSIONS: After a brief online tutorial and only two practice attempts, emergency physicians were able to quickly and accurately interpret ultrasound intubation clips of esophageal and endotracheal intubations.