A Review of Chlorhexidine Oral Care in Patients Receiving Mechanical Ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Chlorhexidine gluconate has been considered the criterion standard of oral care for patients receiving mechanical ventilation because of its ability to reduce the incidence of ventilator-associated events. Optimal concentrations and frequencies remain unclear, as do adverse events related to mortality in various intensive care unit populations. OBJECTIVE: To examine the current evidence for the efficacy of chlorhexidine gluconate in reducing the incidence of ventilator-associated events, mortality, intensive care unit length of stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation in patients receiving ventilator support. METHODS: In this integrative review, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), MEDLINE, and Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition were searched using terms related to mechanical ventilation and chlorhexidine gluconate oral care with dates ranging from 2012 to 2023. RESULTS: Seventeen articles were included in this review: 8 systematic reviews, 8 randomized clinical trials (3 of which were not included in any systematic review), and 1 quasi-experimental study. Chlorhexidine gluconate oral care was associated with a reduced incidence of ventilator-associated events, but efficacy depended on concentration and frequency of administration. With stratification by intensive care unit population type, a nonsignificant trend toward increased mortality was found among non-cardiac surgical patients who received this care. CONCLUSION: The evidence regarding the efficacy of chlorhexidine gluconate oral care in reducing ventilator-associated events in specific intensive care unit populations is contradictory. Recently published guidelines recommend de-implementation of chlorhexidine gluconate oral care in all patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Such care may be beneficial only in the cardiac surgical population.

Probable Non-Ventilator-Associated Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia: A Case Report.

INTRODUCTION: Non-ventilator-associated hospital-acquired pneumonia is a preventable health care-associated infection accounting for 1 in 14 hospital deaths. Clinical factors influencing this condition include oral health and bacteria and oral care. This case report addresses diagnostics and clinical variables related to non-ventilator-associated hospital-acquired pneumonia and emphasizes the importance of prevention. CLINICAL FINDINGS: A 90-year-old woman was admitted to the hospital with shortness of breath and generalized weakness from new-onset atrial fibrillation and suspected heart failure exacerbation. During the hospitalization, her oral health status declined and oral bacterial colonization shifted, with Neisseria becoming the most common oral bacterial genus around the time of development of probable non-ventilator-associated hospital-acquired pneumonia. DIAGNOSIS: The patient had new respiratory symptoms and a chest radiograph positive for pneumonia on day 4 and was subsequently diagnosed with probable non-ventilator-associated hospital-acquired pneumonia. INTERVENTIONS: Intravenous antibiotic treatment was initiated. Oral care was completed on only 2 of 7 days. The patient received limited ambulation assistance and encouragement from staff and family members. No dysphagia screening was documented. OUTCOMES: On day 6, the patient was discharged with oral antibiotics to her independent living facility with home health care. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent oral care, early and frequent physical activity, and measures aimed to reduce aspiration risk are key interventions for all hospitalized patients to prevent non-ventilator-associated hospital-acquired pneumonia. Further research is warranted to assess shifts in oral bacteria and general oral health during hospitalization, which could provide clinically meaningful data on risk for non-ventilator-associated hospital-acquired pneumonia.

Screening Out False Participants in Research Recruitment from Social Media Groups.

ABSTRACT: Social media-based groups offer a rich opportunity for nurse researchers to connect with potential study participants. However, as the authors discovered from recruitment of acute respiratory distress syndrome survivors in social media-based survivorship groups, there is a risk of enrollment of both false and duplicate participants. Nurse researchers should adopt best practices to screen out false participants and prevent duplicate participation. Lessons learned from recruitment in social media groups include avoiding the use of survey links, requiring video interviews or home visits for confirmation of identity, adoption of strategic screening questions, and avoidance of international groups (unless the aim is to recruit foreign nationals). Adoption of these practices can help to ensure that the data collected from group patrons are trustworthy. Nurses who read research and adopt findings into practice should critically examine if researchers implemented strategies to screen out false and duplicate participants to protect data integrity.

Microbiome profile informs cleansing and storage practices for reusable feeding tube stylets in critical care.

BACKGROUND: Cleansing and storage practices for reusable feeding tube stylets are varied and lack consensus guidelines. Almost 40% of critical care nurses do not cleanse reusable stylets. Our proof-of-concept study aimed to identify potential microbial contamination of stylets before and after cleansing with 70% isopropyl alcohol to establish practice standards. METHODS: This prospective, exploratory pilot study sampled reusable feeding tube stylets using three different stylet sample sets. Set 1 included human participant stylets sampled for microbiome profile precleansing, and postcleansing and reinsertion into feeding tubes (n = 4). Sets 2 and 3 included stylets stored at the bedside. Set 2 included precleansed stylets for microbiome profiles (n = 5). Set 3 included precleansed and postcleansed stylets sampled for quantitative cultures (n = 5). Careful handling and storage protocols were used. Microbiome profiling used 16s ribosomal RNA gene amplicon sequencing. RESULTS: Bacterial species identified on stylets were primarily common microflora and opportunistic pathogens, including Streptococcus pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas fulva, Cutibacterium acnes, Prevotella melaninogenica, and Lactobacillus paracasei. Microbiological culturing of stylet samples (set 3) did not yield growth for 9/10 samples; Staphylococcus capitis was identified in one postcleansed sample. Mean bacterial species diversity (alpha diversity) decreased following alcohol cleansing (M = 2.54 pre, M = 1.5 post; P = 0.006). CONCLUSION: The abundance of several potentially opportunistic pathogens indicated plausible risk for gut contamination secondary to reinsertion of stylets into small-bore feeding tubes. Stylet cleansing with 70% isopropyl alcohol reduced bacterial burden on the stylets, although viability was unknown. Careful cleansing, handling, and storage protocols for reusable stylets are necessary to minimize contamination.

Association of enteral feeding with microaspiration in critically ill adults.

AIM: This study explored relationships between enteral feeding and tracheal pepsin A. BACKGROUND: Mechanically ventilated (MV) patients receiving enteral feeding are at risk for microaspiration. Tracheal pepsin A, an enzyme specific to gastric cells, was a proxy for microaspiration of gastric secretions. METHODS: Secondary analysis of RCT data from critically ill, MV adults was conducted. Microaspiration prevention included elevated head of bed, endotracheal tube cuff pressure management, and regular oral care. Tracheal secretions for pepsin A were collected every 12 h. Microaspiration was defined as pepsin A ≥ 6.25 ng/mL. Positive pepsin A in >30 % of individual tracheal samples was defined as abundant microaspiration (frequent aspirator). Chi-squared, Fisher's Exact test, and generalized linear model (GLM) were used. RESULTS: Tracheal pepsin A was present in 111/283 (39 %) mechanically ventilated patients and 48 (17 %) had abundant microaspiration. Enteral feeding was associated with tracheal pepsin A, which occurred within 24 h of enteral feeding. Of the patients who aspirated, the majority received some enteral feeding 96/111 (86 %), compared to only 15/111 (14 %) who received no feeding. A greater number of positive pepsin A events occurred with post-pyloric feeding tube location (55.6 %) vs. gastric (48.6 %), although significant only at the event-level. Frequent aspirators (abundant pepsin A) had higher pepsin A levels compared to infrequent aspirators. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings confirmed the stomach as the microaspiration source. Contrary to other studies, distal feeding tube location did not mitigate microaspiration. Timing for first positive pepsin A should be studied for possible association with enteral feeding intolerance.

Oral Microbes in Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia: Practice and Research Implications.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-acquired pneumonia accounts for 25% of all health care-associated infections and is classified as either ventilator-associated or non-ventilator-associated pneumonia. Hospital-acquired pneumonia most frequently results from aspiration of oropharyngeal secretions into the lungs. Although preventive measures for ventilator-associated pneumonia are well established, few preventive measures exist for the nonventilator type. OBJECTIVE: To (1) explore oral microbes associated with ventilator-associated and non-ventilator-associated pneumonia in acutely ill, adult hospitalized patients, and (2) provide evidence-based recommendations for measures to prevent pneumonia in hospitalized patients. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using CINAHL, Academic Search Premier, Medline, and the Cochrane Library. RESULTS: Ten studies were found that identified common oral microbes in ventilator-associated and non-ventilator-associated pneumonia, including Acinetobacter baumannii, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, S aureus, and Streptococcus pneumoniae. Collectively, oral colonization with E coli, P aeruginosa, methicillin-resistant S aureus, and S aureus increased the risk of nonventilator pneumonia. Findings also suggested microaspiration of colonized oral microbes into the lungs. Non-ventilator-associated pneumonia had similar colonization rates of gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria, whereas ventilator-associated pneumonia had greater colonization with gram-negative bacteria. The literature did not indicate a standard of oral care effective in all patient populations. DISCUSSION: Oral care is an effective intervention to prevent hospital-acquired pneumonia by reducing pathogenic oral microbial colonization. The impact of different methods and timing of oral care on oral microbes should be further explored, particularly in patients not receiving mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: Findings reaffirm the importance of consistent oral care in hospitalized patients. In addition, practices should be different in patients receiving mechanical ventilation versus patients not receiving ventilation. Results may also provide knowledge to inform future preventive measures for pneumonia, particularly for nonventilator pneumonia.

Pepsin A in Tracheal Secretions From Patients Receiving Mechanical Ventilation.

BACKGROUND: In patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) receiving mechanical ventilation, aspiration of gastric contents may lead to ventilator-associated events and other adverse outcomes. Pepsin in pulmonary secretions is a biomarker of microaspiration of gastric contents. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association between tracheal pepsin A and clinical outcomes related to ventilator use. METHODS: A subset of 297 patients from a larger clinical trial on aspiration of oral secretions in adults receiving mechanical ventilation consented to have pepsin A measured in their tracheal aspirate samples. A concentration ≥6.25 ng/mL indicated a positive result. Abundant microaspiration was defined as pepsin A in ≥30% of samples. Statistical analyses included analysis of variance, analysis of covariance, and χ2 tests. RESULTS: Most patients were White men, mean age 59.7 (SD, 18.8) years. Microaspiration was found in 43.8% of patients (n = 130), with abundant microaspiration detected in 17.5% (n = 52). After acuity was controlled for, patients with tracheal pepsin A had a longer mechanical ventilation duration (155 vs 104 hours, P < .001) and ICU stay (9.9 vs 8.2 days, P = .04), but not a longer hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: Microaspiration of gastric contents occurred in nearly half of patients and was associated with a longer duration of mechanical ventilation and a longer stay in the ICU. Additional preventative interventions beyond backrest elevation, oropharyngeal suctioning, and management of endotracheal tube cuff pressure may be needed. Also, the timing of pepsin measurements to capture all microaspiration events requires additional exploration.

A Call for the World Health Organization to Create International Classification of Disease Diagnostic Codes for Post-Intensive Care Syndrome in the Age of COVID-19.

Post-intensive care syndrome (PICS), a condition found in survivors of critical illness, is characterized by persistent physical, cognitive, and psychological sequelae that impact the quality of life after discharge from an intensive care unit (ICU). At present, there are no International Classification of Disease (ICD) billing codes for this condition. Without financial alignment, clinicians cannot diagnose PICS, hindering tracking of its prevalence and impeding policy development for this condition. Clinicians should be screening for PICS in all survivors of critical illness, particularly those with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Results from single-center studies suggest over 75 percent of ARDS survivors develop PICS. With nearly 5 percent of patients with COVID-19 requiring ICU admission for ARDS, it is important for clinicians to be able to diagnose PICS in survivors, and researchers to be able to track it. Member states should impress upon the World Health Organization to create ICD-10 codes for PICS.

Pulmonary Microbiome of Patients Receiving Mechanical Ventilation: Changes Over Time.

BACKGROUND: Interest in the pulmonary microbiome is growing, particularly in patients undergoing mechanical ventilation. OBJECTIVES: To explore the pulmonary microbiome over time in patients undergoing prolonged mechanical ventilation and to evaluate the effect of an oral suctioning intervention on the microbiome. METHODS: This descriptive subanalysis from a clinical trial involved a random sample of 16 participants (7 intervention, 9 control) who received mechanical ventilation for at least 5 days. Five paired oral and tracheal specimens were evaluated for each participant over time. Bacterial DNA from the paired specimens was evaluated using 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Bacterial taxonomy composition, α-diversity (Shannon index), and ß-diversity (Morisita-Horn index) were calculated and compared within and between participants. RESULTS: Participants were predominantly male (69%) and White (63%), with a mean age of 58 years, and underwent mechanical ventilation for a mean of 9.36 days. Abundant bacterial taxa included Prevotella, Staphylococcus, Streptococcus, Stenotrophomonas, and Veillonella. Mean tracheal α-diversity decreased over time for the total group (P = .002) and the control group (P = .02). ß-Diversity was lower (P = .04) in the control group (1.905) than in the intervention group (2.607). CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged mechanical ventilation was associated with changes in the pulmonary microbiome, with the control group having less diversity. The oral suctioning intervention may have reduced oral-tracheal bacterial transmission.

Manual vs Automatic Prone Positioning and Patient Outcomes in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Prone positioning is a standard treatment for moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), but the outcomes associated with manual versus automatic prone positioning have not been evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively evaluate outcomes associated with manual versus automatic prone positioning as part of a pronation quality improvement project implemented by a multidisciplinary team. METHODS: A retrospective, descriptive-comparative approach was used to analyze data from 24 months of a prone positioning protocol for ARDS. The study involved 37 patients, with 16 undergoing manual and 21 undergoing automatic prone positioning. Descriptive and nonparametric statistical analyses were used to evaluate outcomes associated with manual versus automatic prone positioning. RESULTS: Outcomes were similar between the 2 groups regarding time to initiation of prone positioning, discharge disposition, and length of stay. Manually pronated patients were less likely to experience interruptions in therapy (P = .005) and complications (P = .002). Pressure injuries were the most common type of complication, with the most frequent locations in automatically pronated patients being the head (P = .045), thorax (P = .003), and lower extremities (P = .047). Manual prone positioning resulted in a cost avoidance of $78 617 per patient. CONCLUSION: Manual prone positioning has outcomes similar to those of automatic prone positioning with less risk of interruptions in therapy, fewer complications, and lower expense. Further research is needed to determine whether manual prone positioning is superior to automatic prone positioning in patients with ARDS.

Intubation Setting, Aspiration, and Ventilator-Associated Conditions.

BACKGROUND: Patients experience endotracheal intubation in various settings with wide-ranging risks for postintubation complications such as aspiration and ventilator-associated conditions. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate associations between intubation setting, presence of aspiration biomarkers, and clinical outcomes. METHODS: This study is a subanalysis of data from the NO-ASPIRATE single-blinded randomized clinical trial. Data were prospectively collected for 513 adult patients intubated within 24 hours of enrollment. Patients with documented aspiration events at intubation were excluded. In the NO-ASPIRATE trial, intervention patients received enhanced oropharyngeal suctioning every 4 hours and control patients received sham suctioning. Tracheal specimens for α-amylase and pepsin tests were collected upon enrollment. Primary outcomes were ventilator hours, lengths of stay, and rates of ventilator-associated conditions. RESULTS: Of the baseline tracheal specimens, 76.4% were positive for α-amylase and 33.1% were positive for pepsin. Proportions of positive tracheal α-amylase and pepsin tests did not differ significantly between intubation locations (study hospital, transfer from other hospital, or field intubation). No differences were found for ventilator hours or lengths of stay. Patients intubated at another hospital and transferred had significantly higher ventilator-associated condition rates than did those intubated at the study hospital (P = .02). Ventilator-associated condition rates did not differ significantly between patients intubated in the field and patients in other groups. CONCLUSIONS: Higher ventilator-associated condition rates associated with interhospital transfer may be related to movement from bed, vehicle loading and unloading, and transport vehicle vibrations. Airway assessment and care may also be suboptimal in the transport environment.

Critical Care Guidance for Tracheostomy Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Global, Multidisciplinary Approach.

PURPOSE: Critical care nurses caring for patients with a tracheostomy are at high risk because of the predilection of SARS-CoV-2 for respiratory and mucosal surfaces. This review identifies patient-centered practices that ensure safety and reduce risk of infection transmission to health care workers during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: Consensus statements, guidelines, institutional recommendations, and scientific literature on COVID-19 and previous outbreaks were reviewed. A global interdisciplinary team analyzed and prioritized findings via electronic communications and video conferences to develop consensus recommendations. RESULTS: Aerosol-generating procedures are commonly performed by nurses and other health care workers, most notably during suctioning, tracheostomy tube changes, and stoma care. Patient repositioning, readjusting circuits, administering nebulized medications, and patient transport also present risks. Standard personal protective equipment includes an N95/FFP3 mask with or without surgical masks, gloves, goggles, and gown when performing aerosol-generating procedures for patients with known or suspected COVID-19. Viral testing of bronchial aspirate via tracheostomy may inform care providers when determining the protective equipment required. The need for protocols to reduce risk of transmission of infection to nurses and other health care workers is evident. CONCLUSION: Critical care nurses and multidisciplinary teams often care for patients with a tracheostomy who are known or suspected to have COVID-19. Appropriate care of these patients relies on safeguarding the health care team. The practices described in this review may greatly reduce risk of infectious transmission.

Is α-Amylase an Important Biomarker to Detect Aspiration of Oral Secretions in Ventilated Patients?

Alpha-amylase has emerged as a biomarker of interest in detecting aspiration of oral secretions. In several studies, most ventilated patients have α-amylase values detected in pulmonary secretions. Values of α-amylase are high (as expected) in oral secretions and lowest in bronchoalveolar lavage samples. Around 5-7% of oral α-amylase is detectable in tracheal secretions. Once secretions are aspirated, the duration of detection of α-amylase in pulmonary secretions is unknown. Evidence varies on the relationship between α-amylase and clinical outcomes. Although detection of α-amylase in pulmonary secretions is useful to identify that aspiration has occurred, the lack of standardized reference values, the lack of knowledge regarding duration of detection following aspiration, and mixed findings related to clinical outcomes, limit its usefulness as a measurement tool. If α-amylase is to be used in research and/or clinical practice, additional data are needed to assist in interpretation and application of findings.

Physio-Feedback and Exercise Program (PEER) Improves Balance, Muscle Strength, and Fall Risk in Older Adults.

A one-group pre/posttest study was conducted to examine the feasibility and effect size of an 8-week physio-feedback and exercise program (PEER) on improving balance, muscle strength, and fall risk. Nineteen participants (mean age = 76 years) received the intervention, which included visual physio-feedback by the BTrackS™ Assess Balance System, cognitive reframing, and a combined group- and home-based exercise program by a trained peer coach. Pre- and post-measurement outcomes were evaluated for balance, handgrip strength, and fall risk. Feasibility was assessed by dropout rate, safety, and adherence to exercise. Significant improvements were noted in dynamic balance (Sit-to-Stand, Timed Up & Go tests), handgrip strength, and fall risk. Participants' attendance was 87.5%, with no fall incidence. The physio-feedback, cognitive reframing, and peer coaching facilitate older adults to align their perceived fall risk with physiological fall risk and motivate them to stay active. PEER intervention is feasible; safe; improves balance, muscle strength, and fall risk; and may enhance activity engagement. TARGETS: Community-dwelling older adults. INTERVENTION DESCRIPTION: Provide visual physio-feedback and cognitive reframing based on the fall risk appraisal matrix and participate in combined group- and home-based exercises by a trained peer coach. MECHANISM OF ACTION: Align perceived and physiological fall risk, peer coaching to exercise. OUTCOMES: Balance, handgrip strength, fall risk, and activity engagement. [Research in Gerontological Nursing, 13(6), 289-296.].

Assessing Fall Risk Appraisal Through Combined Physiological and Perceived Fall Risk Measures Using Innovative Technology.

The current study aimed to categorize fall risk appraisal and quantify discrepancies between perceived fall risk measured subjectively using the short Fall Efficacy Scale-International and physiological fall risk measured objectively using the portable BTrackS™ Assess Balance System. One hundred two community-dwelling older adults were evaluated in this cross-sectional study. Approximately 40% of participants had maladaptive fall risk appraisals, which were either irrational (high perceived risk despite low physiological fall risk) or incongruent (low perceived risk but high physiological fall risk). The remaining 60% of participants had adaptive fall risk appraisals, which were either rational (low perceived risk aligned with low physiological fall risk) or congruent (high perceived risk aligned with high physiological fall risk). Among participants with rational, congruent, irrational, and incongruent appraisals, 21.7%, 66.7%, 28%, and 18.8%, respectively, reported having a history of falls (p < 0.01). Using technology to identify discrepancies in perceived and physiological fall risks can potentially increase the success of fall risk screening and guide fall interventions to target perceived or physiological components of balance. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 46(4), 41-47.].

Shifting Maladaptive Fall Risk Appraisal in Older Adults through an in-Home Physio-fEedback and Exercise pRogram (PEER): A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVES: 1) examine the preliminary effectiveness of the Physio-feEdback and Exercise pRogram (PEER) for shifting maladaptive to adaptive fall risk appraisal and reducing fall risk, 2) determine the participants' feedback and acceptability of the program. METHODS: Forty-one older adults were assigned to either PEER intervention or attention control group. The 8-week PEER intervention consists of a visual physio-feedback, cognitive reframing, and combined group and home-based exercise led by a trained peer coach. The attention control group read fall prevention brochures and continued their normal activities. BTrackS Balance Test (BBT), short version of Fall Efficacy Scale International (short FES-I) and CDC fall risk checklist were measured from pre- to post-intervention. The feedback and acceptability were conducted at the program conclusion. RESULTS: About 11% of participants in the PEER group had positive shifting but none in the attention control group. Up to 32% of the participants in attention control had negative shifting compared to 5.3% in the PEER group. PEER group reported significant decreases in fall risk and high acceptability of the program. CONCLUSIONS: PEER intervention facilitates a shift from maladaptive to adaptive fall risk appraisal and reduces fall risk. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Preventive interventions promoting alignment between perceive and physiological fall risk may contribute to reducing falls and increasing exercise adherence.

Impact of deep oropharyngeal suctioning on microaspiration, ventilator events, and clinical outcomes: A randomized clinical trial.

AIMS: To evaluate a deep oropharyngeal suction intervention (NO-ASPIRATE) in intubated patients on microaspiration, ventilator-associated events and clinical outcomes. DESIGN: Prospective, two-group, single-blind, randomized clinical trial. METHODS: The study was conducted between 2014 - 2017 in 513 participants enroled within 24 hr of intubation and randomized into NO-ASPIRATE or usual care groups. Standard oral care was provided to all participants every 4 hr and deep oropharyngeal suctioning was added to the NO-ASPIRATE group. Oral and tracheal specimens were obtained to quantify α-amylase as an aspiration biomarker. RESULTS: Data were analysed for 410 study completers enrolled at least 36 hr: NO-ASPIRATE (N = 206) and usual care (N = 204). Percent of tracheal specimens positive for α-amylase, mean tracheal α-amylase levels over time and ventilator-associated events were not different between groups. The NO-ASPIRATE group had a shorter hospital length of stay and a subgroup with moderate aspiration at baseline had significantly lower α-amylase levels across time. CONCLUSION: Hospital length of stay was shorter in the NO-ASPIRATE group and a subgroup of intervention participants had lower α-amylase across time. Delivery of standardized oral care to all participants may have been an intervention itself and possibly associated with the lack of significant findings for most outcomes. IMPACT: This trial compared usual care to oral care with a deep suctioning intervention on microaspiration and ventilator-associated events, as this has not been systematically studied. Further research on the usefulness of α-amylase as an aspiration biomarker and the role of oral suctioning, especially for certain populations, is indicated. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02284178.

Nursing oral suction intervention to reduce aspiration and ventilator events (NO-ASPIRATE): A randomized clinical trial.

AIM: The primary aim of this study is to compare an oropharyngeal suction intervention versus usual care on microaspiration in intubated patients. Secondary aims are to evaluate the intervention on ventilator-associated condition rates, time to occurrence and compare tracheal-oral α-amylase ratios between groups. DESIGN: Prospective randomized clinical trial. METHODS: The study received funding from the National Institutes of Health in February 2014 and Institutional Review Board approval in July 2013. Over 4 years, a convenience sample of 600 orally intubated, ventilated adult patients will be enrolled within 24 hr of intubation. The target sample is 400 participants randomized to the two groups. The intervention involves enhanced suctioning of the mouth and oropharynx every 4 hr, while the usual care group receives a sham suctioning. The research team will deliver usual oral care to all patients every 4 hr and collect oral and tracheal specimens every 12 hr, to quantify α-amylase levels to detect aspiration of oral secretions. Study completers must be enrolled at least 36 hr (baseline and three paired samples). Outcomes include α-amylase levels, percent of positive specimens, ventilator-associated conditions, length of stay, ventilator hours, and discharge disposition. DISCUSSION: Enrolment has closed, and data analysis has begun. Subgroup analyses emerged, contributing to future research knowledge. IMPACT: Standardized interventions have reduced but do not address all risk factors associated with ventilator-associated conditions. This study provides the potential to reduce microaspiration and associated sequelae in critically ill, intubated patients.

Collecting Nursing Research Data 24 Hours a Day: Challenges, Lessons, and Recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Research on many routine nursing interventions requires data collection around the clock each day (24/7). Strategies for implementing and coordinating a study 24/7 are not discussed in the literature, and best practices are needed. OBJECTIVE: To identify strategies incorporated into implementing a nursing intervention trial 24/7, including key lessons learned. METHODS: Strategies to facilitate implementation of a clinical trial of a nursing intervention with patients undergoing mechanical ventilation are shared. Challenges and changes for future studies also are discussed. RESULTS: Adequate planning, including a detailed operations manual, guides study implementation. Staffing is the most challenging and costly part of a study but is essential to a study's success. Other important strategies include communication among the study personnel and with collaborators and direct care staff. An electronic method of recording study-related data also is essential. CONCLUSIONS: A nursing clinical trial that requires interventions on a 24/7 basis can be done with thorough planning, staffing, and continuous quality improvement activities.

Tracheostomy Care Practices in a Simulated Setting: An Exploratory Study.

PURPOSE/AIMS: Many critically ill patients undergo a tracheostomy. Tracheostomy care is performed to maintain the airway and promote stoma skin integrity. Variation in practices may affect outcomes. The study purpose was to describe tracheostomy care practices of caregivers who perform tracheostomy care in critical care settings and compare practices with published recommendations. DESIGN: This is a descriptive, exploratory study of tracheostomy care practices of nurses and respiratory therapists using a simulated setting. METHODS: Staff working in critical care and step-down units were approached to participate in the study. Equipment used for tracheostomy care and the steps performed were observed and video recorded. Observations were compared with recommended practices. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Fifteen registered nurses (75%) and 5 respiratory therapists (25%) participated. Most participants (80%) were female and held a baccalaureate degree; median experience was 5 years. Equipment used and order of steps varied widely. Only 1 individual performed in the order recommended in a commonly used procedure manual. The most common sequence performed was hand hygiene, clean flange, clean stoma, change inner cannula, change ties, and apply dressing. CONCLUSION: Wide variability in equipment and practices emphasizes the need for establishing an evidence-based approach for performing tracheostomy care to prevent complications.