Establishing a Contingency Plan to Improve Patient Comfort During Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Insertions: A Quality Improvement Effort

Q3 Medicine
Scott T. Wagoner, Jamie M Lorenc, Elizabeth Edmunson, J. Schurman
{"title":"Establishing a Contingency Plan to Improve Patient Comfort During Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Insertions: A Quality Improvement Effort","authors":"Scott T. Wagoner, Jamie M Lorenc, Elizabeth Edmunson, J. Schurman","doi":"10.2309/java-d-21-00024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n \n \n Background: Negative outcomes can occur when painful experiences related to needle procedures are not addressed. Patients at the institution in this study were not demonstrating sufficient levels of comfort during peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) placements, so formal assessment of discomfort or distress began via the Pediatric Sedation State Scale (PSSS), and an enhanced approach to comfort planning, built around the Comfort Promise, was implemented. Over 1 year, we aimed to increase the percent of patients meeting sufficient comfort during PICC insertions by our Vascular Access Team (VAT) from 54% to 65%.\n Methods: Initially, VAT staff were educated on use of the PSSS and began routinely charting the highest score obtained during each PICC placement. Interventions were delivered concurrently and included (1) changing the VAT culture, (2) process development, (3) consensus building and scale up, and (4) information system modifications.\n Results: During the project period, 421 PICC insertions were completed. From baseline to the last 8 months, the percent of patients rated as experiencing sufficient comfort (PSSS = 2–3) during PICC placement increased from 54% to 74%, with the percent of patients experiencing significant discomfort or distress (PSSS = 4–5) decreasing from 45% to under 7%.\n Conclusions: Success in this project required a culture change. Building consensus by engaging others and integrating with the processes, preferences, and priorities of each area was key. Future work will focus on increasing use of all Comfort Promise bundle elements, identifying patients at risk for escalation, and taking a long-term view to comfort planning, as well as applying lessons learned to other needle procedures.\n","PeriodicalId":35321,"journal":{"name":"JAVA - Journal of the Association for Vascular Access","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAVA - Journal of the Association for Vascular Access","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2309/java-d-21-00024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Negative outcomes can occur when painful experiences related to needle procedures are not addressed. Patients at the institution in this study were not demonstrating sufficient levels of comfort during peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) placements, so formal assessment of discomfort or distress began via the Pediatric Sedation State Scale (PSSS), and an enhanced approach to comfort planning, built around the Comfort Promise, was implemented. Over 1 year, we aimed to increase the percent of patients meeting sufficient comfort during PICC insertions by our Vascular Access Team (VAT) from 54% to 65%. Methods: Initially, VAT staff were educated on use of the PSSS and began routinely charting the highest score obtained during each PICC placement. Interventions were delivered concurrently and included (1) changing the VAT culture, (2) process development, (3) consensus building and scale up, and (4) information system modifications. Results: During the project period, 421 PICC insertions were completed. From baseline to the last 8 months, the percent of patients rated as experiencing sufficient comfort (PSSS = 2–3) during PICC placement increased from 54% to 74%, with the percent of patients experiencing significant discomfort or distress (PSSS = 4–5) decreasing from 45% to under 7%. Conclusions: Success in this project required a culture change. Building consensus by engaging others and integrating with the processes, preferences, and priorities of each area was key. Future work will focus on increasing use of all Comfort Promise bundle elements, identifying patients at risk for escalation, and taking a long-term view to comfort planning, as well as applying lessons learned to other needle procedures.
建立一个应急计划,以提高患者舒适度在周围插入中心导管插入:质量改进的努力
背景:当与针头操作相关的痛苦经历没有得到解决时,可能会出现负面结果。在本研究中,该机构的患者在周围插入中心导管(PICC)放置期间没有表现出足够的舒适水平,因此通过儿科镇静状态量表(PSSS)开始正式评估不适或窘迫,并实施了围绕舒适承诺建立的增强的舒适计划方法。在1年的时间里,我们的目标是将血管通路小组(VAT)在PICC插入过程中感到足够舒适的患者比例从54%提高到65%。方法:最初,增值税工作人员接受了使用PSSS的教育,并开始在每次PICC安置期间例行绘制最高分数。干预措施同时交付,包括(1)改变增值税文化,(2)流程开发,(3)建立共识和扩大规模,以及(4)信息系统修改。结果:项目期间共完成PICC插入421例。从基线到最后8个月,在PICC放置期间,被评为足够舒适(PSSS = 2-3)的患者百分比从54%增加到74%,而经历明显不适或痛苦的患者百分比(PSSS = 4-5)从45%下降到7%以下。结论:这个项目的成功需要文化的改变。关键是要通过与他人的接触和整合每个领域的过程、偏好和优先级来建立共识。未来的工作将集中在增加所有Comfort Promise bundle元素的使用,识别有升级风险的患者,并从长远的角度来制定舒适计划,以及将经验教训应用于其他针头操作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JAVA - Journal of the Association for Vascular Access
JAVA - Journal of the Association for Vascular Access Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: The Association for Vascular Access (AVA) is an association of healthcare professionals founded in 1985 to promote the emerging vascular access specialty. Today, its multidisciplinary membership advances research, professional and public education to shape practice and enhance patient outcomes, and partners with the device manufacturing community to bring about evidence-based innovations in vascular access.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信