Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Hosp Med ; 14(1): 38-41, 2019 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30667409

RESUMEN

We created Sleep for Inpatients: Empowering Staff to Act (SIESTA), which combines electronic "nudges" to forgo nocturnal vitals and medications with interprofessional education on improving patient sleep. In one "SIESTAenhanced unit," nurses received coaching and integrated SIESTA into daily huddles; a standard unit did not. Six months pre- and post-SIESTA, sleep-friendly orders rose in both units (foregoing vital signs: SIESTA unit, 4% to 34%; standard, 3% to 22%, P < .001 both; sleeppromoting VTE prophylaxis: SIESTA, 15% to 42%; standard, 12% to 28%, P < .001 both). In the SIESTAenhanced unit, nighttime room entries dropped by 44% (-6.3 disruptions/room, P < .001), and patients were more likely to report no disruptions for nighttime vital signs (70% vs 41%, P = .05) or medications (84% vs 57%, P = .031) than those in the standard unit. The standard unit was not changed. Although sleep-friendly orders were adopted in both units, a unit-based nursing empowerment approach was associated with fewer nighttime room entries and improved patient experience.

2.
J Clin Sleep Med ; 13(2): 301-306, 2017 Feb 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27923432

RESUMEN

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Although important to recovery, sleeping in the hospital is difficult because of disruptions. Understanding how patients, hospital physicians, and nurses perceive sleep disruptions and identifying which disruptions are associated with objective sleep loss can help target improvement initiatives. METHODS: Patients and hospital staff completed the Potential Hospital Sleep Disruptions and Noises Questionnaire (PHSDNQ). Cutoff points were defined based on means, and responses were dichotomized. Perceived percent disrupted for each item was calculated, and responses were compared across groups using chi-square tests. Objective sleep time of patients was measured using wrist actigraphy. The association between patient-reported disruptions and objective sleep time was assessed using a multivariable linear regression model controlling for subject random effects. RESULTS: Twenty-eight physicians (78%), 37 nurses (88%), and 166 of their patients completed the PHSDNQ. Patients, physicians, and nurses agreed that pain, vital signs and tests were the top three disrupters to patient sleep. Significant differences among the groups' perceptions existed for alarms [24% (patients) vs. 46% (physicians) vs. 27% (nurses), p < 0.040], room temperature (15% vs. 0% vs. 5%, p < 0.031) and anxiety (18% vs. 21% vs. 38%, p < 0.031). Using survey and actigraphy data from 645 nights and 379 patients, the presence of pain was the only disruption associated with lower objective sleep duration (minutes) [-38.1 (95% confidence interval -63.2, -12.9) p < 0.003]. CONCLUSION: Hospital staff and patients agreed that pain, vital signs and tests were top sleep disrupters. However, pain was associated with the greatest objective sleep loss, highlighting the need for proactive screening and management of patient pain to improve sleep in hospitals.


Asunto(s)
Actitud del Personal de Salud , Actitud Frente a la Salud , Pacientes Internos/psicología , Personal de Hospital/psicología , Trastornos del Inicio y del Mantenimiento del Sueño/etiología , Trastornos del Inicio y del Mantenimiento del Sueño/psicología , Actigrafía , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Cuerpo Médico de Hospitales/psicología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Personal de Enfermería en Hospital/psicología , Sueño , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Factores de Tiempo
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA