Evaluation of the implementation of a best practice information sheet: tracheal suctioning of adults with an artificial airway

Ann M McKillop
{"title":"Evaluation of the implementation of a best practice information sheet: tracheal suctioning of adults with an artificial airway","authors":"Ann M McKillop","doi":"10.1111/J.1479-6988.2004.00015.X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose  This report presents an evaluation of the implementation of a Best Practice Information Sheet related to tracheal suctioning of adults with an artificial airway. The Centre for Evidence-Based Nursing Aotearoa based in Auckland, New Zealand, conducted a systematic review of the evidence and produced a Best Practice Information Sheet. The present study is an evaluation of the impact of this information sheet. The study also describes the process used to implement the Best Practice Information Sheet at each of three study sites. \n \nMethod  A survey of 105 nurses was conducted at three sites: one in New Zealand and two in Australia. Using a before/after design, data were collected at the time of release of the Best Practice Information Sheet and then approximately 12 months later. Suctioning practice was observed with a focus on assessment of the patient by the nurse, the procedure used to suction and the bases for decisions made about suctioning. Before and after data were compared to capture the possible effects on practice of the recommendations in the Best Practice Information Sheet. Those involved in leading the implementation process at each site were interviewed by telephone, notes from the interviews were thematically analysed and comparisons were drawn. \n \nResults  The degree of uptake of the evidence was variable across the three sites and across the recommendations. For a number of recommendations, there was a modest trend towards the uptake of the recommendations of the Best Practice Information Sheet. Other recommendations were congruent with existing usual practice and therefore no change was observed. Each study site employed a range of strategies to implement the Best Practice Information Sheet. Improved practice was seen in relation to a greater number of recommendations at one site. This site appears to have used more sources of information to evaluate the quality of practice, which may have raised the profile of suctioning and its impact on patients. \n \nConclusions  This study suggests a trend towards a modest uptake of best practice recommendations into nursing practice demonstrated by some behavioural changes within a 12-month period in the context of an implementation plan and a Best Practice Information Sheet.","PeriodicalId":100738,"journal":{"name":"JBI Reports","volume":"11 5 1","pages":"293-308"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"24","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBI Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1479-6988.2004.00015.X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 24

Abstract

Purpose  This report presents an evaluation of the implementation of a Best Practice Information Sheet related to tracheal suctioning of adults with an artificial airway. The Centre for Evidence-Based Nursing Aotearoa based in Auckland, New Zealand, conducted a systematic review of the evidence and produced a Best Practice Information Sheet. The present study is an evaluation of the impact of this information sheet. The study also describes the process used to implement the Best Practice Information Sheet at each of three study sites. Method  A survey of 105 nurses was conducted at three sites: one in New Zealand and two in Australia. Using a before/after design, data were collected at the time of release of the Best Practice Information Sheet and then approximately 12 months later. Suctioning practice was observed with a focus on assessment of the patient by the nurse, the procedure used to suction and the bases for decisions made about suctioning. Before and after data were compared to capture the possible effects on practice of the recommendations in the Best Practice Information Sheet. Those involved in leading the implementation process at each site were interviewed by telephone, notes from the interviews were thematically analysed and comparisons were drawn. Results  The degree of uptake of the evidence was variable across the three sites and across the recommendations. For a number of recommendations, there was a modest trend towards the uptake of the recommendations of the Best Practice Information Sheet. Other recommendations were congruent with existing usual practice and therefore no change was observed. Each study site employed a range of strategies to implement the Best Practice Information Sheet. Improved practice was seen in relation to a greater number of recommendations at one site. This site appears to have used more sources of information to evaluate the quality of practice, which may have raised the profile of suctioning and its impact on patients. Conclusions  This study suggests a trend towards a modest uptake of best practice recommendations into nursing practice demonstrated by some behavioural changes within a 12-month period in the context of an implementation plan and a Best Practice Information Sheet.
评估最佳实践信息表的实施情况:成人人工气道气管吸引
目的:本报告介绍了与成人人工气道气管吸引相关的最佳实践信息表的实施评估。位于新西兰奥克兰的循证护理中心对证据进行了系统审查,并编制了最佳实践信息表。本研究是对这一信息表的影响进行评估。该研究还描述了在三个研究地点实施最佳实践信息表的过程。方法对新西兰和澳大利亚3个地点的105名护士进行调查。使用前后设计,在发布最佳实践信息表时收集数据,然后在大约12个月后收集数据。观察抽吸实践,重点是护士对患者的评估,用于抽吸的程序和抽吸决策的基础。对最佳实践信息表中建议的实施前后数据进行了比较,以获取可能对实践产生的影响。在每个场址领导执行进程的人员接受了电话采访,对采访的记录进行了专题分析,并进行了比较。结果在三个地点和不同的建议中,证据的接受程度是不同的。对于若干建议,有采纳《最佳做法资料单》建议的适度趋势。其他建议与现有惯例一致,因此未见任何变化。每个研究地点采用一系列策略来实施最佳实践信息表。改进的做法是在一个站点上看到更多的建议。该网站似乎使用了更多的信息来源来评估实践的质量,这可能提高了吸引的形象及其对患者的影响。结论:本研究表明,在实施计划和最佳实践信息表的背景下,在12个月的时间内,一些行为变化证明了将最佳实践建议适度纳入护理实践的趋势。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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