Improving the recognition and management of hemorrhage: A scoping review of nursing and midwifery education.

BACKGROUND: Hemorrhage is a frequent complication that nurses and midwives must recognize and manage to avoid life-threatening consequences for patients. There is currently no synthesis of evidence on educational interventions in nursing and midwifery regarding hemorrhage, thus limiting the definition of best practices. OBJECTIVE: To map the literature on nursing and midwifery education regarding the recognition and management of hemorrhage. DESIGN: Scoping review based on the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. DATA SOURCES: Quantitative studies evaluating the effect of educational interventions with students, nurses, or midwives published in English or French, with no time limit. REVIEW METHODS: Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were conducted by two independent reviewers. We characterized educational interventions based on the Guideline for Reporting Evidence-Based Practice Educational Interventions and Teaching. We categorized learning outcomes using the New World Kirkpatrick Model. Methodological quality appraisal was performed with tools from the Joanna Briggs Institute. Findings were synthesized using descriptive statistics and graphical methods RESULT: Most of the 38 studies used a single-group design (n = 26, 68%) and were conducted with professionals (n = 28, 74%) in hospital settings (n = 20, 53%). Most were of low (n = 14; 37%) or moderate (n = 18, 47%) methodological quality. Most interventions focused on postpartum hemorrhage (n = 34, 89%) and combined two or more teaching strategies (n = 25, 66%), often pairing an informational segment (e.g., lecture, readings) with a practical session (e.g., workshop, simulation). Learning outcomes related to the management (n = 27; 71%) and recognition of hemorrhage (n = 19, 50%), as well as results for patients and organizations (n = 9, 24%). CONCLUSION: Considerable heterogeneity in interventions and learning outcomes precluded conducting a systematic review of effectiveness. High-quality, controlled studies are needed, particularly in surgery and trauma. Reflection on the contribution of nurses and midwives to the detection, monitoring, and management of hemorrhage could enrich the content and expected outcomes of hemorrhage education.

Frailty, Cognitive Impairment, and Anticoagulation Among Older Adults with Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Oral anticoagulation (OAC) is challenging in older patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) who are often frail and have cognitive impairment. We examined the characteristics of older NVAF patients associated with higher odds of physical and cognitive impairments. We also examined if these high-risk patients have different OAC prescribing patterns and their satisfaction with treatment because it may impact optimal management of their NVAF. METHODS: The patients in the Systematic Assessment of Geriatric Elements in Atrial Fibrillation (SAGE-AF study cohort 2016-2018) had NVAF, were aged 65 and older, and eligible for the receipt of OAC. Measures included frailty (Fried Frailty scale), cognitive impairment (Montreal Cognitive Assessment Battery), OAC prescribing and type (direct oral anticoagulant [DOAC] or vitamin K antagonist [VKA]), depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), bleeding, stroke risk, and treatment benefit (Anti-Clot Treatment Scale). RESULTS: Patients (n = 1,244) were 49% female, aged 76 (standard deviation = 7) years. A total of 14% were frail, and 42% had cognitive impairment. Frailty and cognitive impairment co-occurred in 9%. Odds of having both impairments versus none were higher with depression (odds ratio [OR] = 4.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.59-8.26), older age (OR = 1.56; 95% CI = 1.29-1.88), lower education (OR = 3.81; 95%CI = 2.13-6.81), race/ethnicity other than non-Hispanic White (OR = 7.94; 95% CI = 4.34-14.55), bleeding risk (OR = 1.43; 95% CI = 1.12-1.81), and stroke risk (OR = 1.35; 95% CI = 1.13-1.62). OAC prescribing was not associated with CI and frailty status. Among patients taking OACs (85%), those with both impairments were more likely to take DOAC than VKA (OR = 1.69; 95% CI = 1.01-2.80). Having both impairments (OR = 1.87; 95% CI = 1.08-3.27) or cognitive impairment (OR = 1.56; 95% CI = 1.09-2.24) was associated with higher odds of reporting lower treatment benefit. CONCLUSION: In a large cohort of older NVAF patients, half were frail or cognitively impaired, and 9% had both impairments. We highlight the characteristics of patients who may benefit from cognitive and physical function screenings to maximize treatment and enhance prognosis. Finally, the co-occurrence of impairment was associated with low perceived benefit of treatment that may impede optimal management.

Geriatric Elements and Oral Anticoagulant Prescribing in Older Atrial Fibrillation Patients: SAGE-AF.

OBJECTIVES: Oral anticoagulants are the cornerstone of stroke prevention in high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Geriatric elements, such as cognitive impairment and frailty, commonly occur in these patients and are often cited as reasons for not prescribing oral anticoagulants. We sought to systematically assess geriatric impairments in patients with AF and determine whether they were associated with oral anticoagulant prescribing. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from the ongoing Systematic Assessment of Geriatric Elements in Atrial Fibrillation (SAGE-AF) prospective cohort study. SETTING: Multicenter study with site locations in Massachusetts and Georgia that recruited participants from cardiology, electrophysiology, and primary care clinics from 2016 to 2018. PARTICIPANTS: Participants with AF age 65 years or older, CHA2 DS2 -VASc (congestive heart failure; hypertension; aged ≥75 y [doubled]; diabetes mellitus; prior stroke, transient ischemic attack, or thromboembolism [doubled]; vascular disease; age 65-74; female sex) score of 2 or higher, and no oral anticoagulant contraindications (n = 1244). MEASUREMENTS: A six-component geriatric assessment included validated measures of frailty, cognitive function, social support, depressive symptoms, vision, and hearing. Oral anticoagulant use was abstracted from the medical record. RESULTS: A total of 1244 participants (mean age = 76 y; 49% female; 85% white) were enrolled; 42% were cognitively impaired, 14% frail, 53% pre-frail, 12% socially isolated, and 29% had depressive symptoms. Oral anticoagulants were prescribed to 86% of the cohort. Oral anticoagulant prescribing did not vary according to any of the geriatric elements (adjusted odds ratios [ORs] for oral anticoagulant prescribing and cognitive impairment: OR = .75; 95% confidence interval [CI] = .51-1.09; frail OR = .69; 95% CI = .35-1.36; social isolation OR = .90; 95% CI = .52-1.54; depression OR = .79; 95% CI = .49-1.27; visual impairment OR = .98; 95% CI = .65-1.48; and hearing impairment OR = 1.05; 95% CI = .71-1.54). CONCLUSION: Geriatric impairments, particularly cognitive impairment and frailty, were common in our cohort, but treatment with oral anticoagulants did not differ by impairment status. These geriatric impairments are commonly cited as reasons for not prescribing oral anticoagulants, suggesting that prescribers may either be unaware or deliberately ignoring the presence of these factors in clinical settings. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:147-154, 2019.