RESUMO
BACKGROUND: More than one billion of peripheral venous catheters are inserted into hospitalized patients every year. This study sought to identify the status of nursing care in vascular accesses in different hospitals and to evaluate the impact of a series of informative and formative interventions aimed at their care. METHODS: Quasi-experimental, multicenter study. A total of 54 nursing professionals of 19 hospitals participated. The intervention consisted of informative talk and three training sessions related to the care and maintenance of vascular accesses and intravenous therapy in the hospital-admitted adult population. This was delivered in four years, with eight periodic cross-sectional assessments conducted before and after each intervention. To assess quality of nursing care in vascular accesses and intravenous therapy, a quality indicator called Standard Variable (VES), was developed and validated with the Delphi methodology. RESULTS: A total of 21,108 patients, aged 64.0 years (SD 18.3), were assessed, of which 78.3% (16,516) had some type of vascular access inserted. An average of 22.1% (95% CI: 21.4-22.7) were classified as optimal. In total, 3218 nursing care professionals took part in the training activities. The VES indicator grew steadily throughout the study, raising from 7.8% to 37.6%. Changes were statistically significant between those time points in which one of the described interventions was delivered; however, there were no significant changes between time points with no intervention. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports that continuous training interventions can produce improvements in the quality of nursing care and reduce complications in patients with vascular accesses. In addition, the VES indicator was a useful and simple tool to measure quality, but the experience with its use suggests continuous research in the search for standardized indicators that objectify the evaluation and evolution of care.
Assuntos
Hospitalização , Hospitais , Adulto , Humanos , Estudos Transversais , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , IdosoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Most evidence of the effectiveness of influenza vaccines comes from studies conducted in primary care, but less is known about their effectiveness in preventing serious complications. Here, we examined the influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against hospitalization with PCR-confirmed influenza in the predominant A(H3N2) 2011-2012 influenza season. METHODS: A hospital-based, test-negative study was conducted in nine hospitals in Valencia, Spain. All emergency admissions with a predefined subset of symptoms were eligible. We enrolled consenting adults age 18 and over, targeted for influenza vaccination because of comorbidity, with symptoms of influenza-like-illness within seven days of admission. We estimated IVE as (1-adjusted vaccination odds ratio)*100 after accounting for major confounders, calendar time and recruitment hospital. RESULTS: The subjects included 544 positive for influenza A(H3N2) and 1,370 negative for influenza admissions. Age was an IVE modifying factor. Regardless of vaccine administration, IVE was 72% (38 to 88%) in subjects aged under 65 and 21% (-5% to 40%) in subjects aged 65 and over. By type of vaccine, the IVE of classical intramuscular split-influenza vaccine, used in subjects 18 to 64, was 68% (12% to 88%). The IVE for intradermal and virosomal influenza vaccines, used in subjects aged 65 and over, was 39% (11% to 58%) and 16% (-39% to 49%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The split-influenza vaccine was effective in preventing influenza-associated hospitalizations in adults aged under 65. The intradermal vaccine was moderately effective in those aged 65 and over.
