Kellie Girardot, Jan Powers, Lisa Morgan, Lisa Hollister
{"title":"评估创伤患者的新型静脉血栓栓塞压迫机械装置：试点研究。","authors":"Kellie Girardot, Jan Powers, Lisa Morgan, Lisa Hollister","doi":"10.1097/JTN.0000000000000779","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the fourth most common preventable hospital-acquired complication for hospitalized trauma patients. Mechanical prophylaxis, using sequential compression or intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) devices, is recommended alongside pharmacologic prophylaxis for VTE prevention. However, compliance with device use is a barrier that reduces the effectiveness of mechanical prophylaxis.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to determine whether using the Movement and Compressions (MAC) system compared with an IPC device impacts compliance with mechanical VTE prophylaxis in trauma patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study used a before-and-after design with historical control at a Level II trauma center with a convenience sample of adult trauma patients admitted to the intensive care unit or acute care floor for at least 24 h. We trialed the MAC device for 2 weeks in November and December 2022 with prospective data collection. Data collection for the historical control group occurred retrospectively using patients from a point-in-time audit of IPC device compliance from August and September of 2022.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 51 patients met inclusion criteria, with 34 patients in the IPC group and 17 patients in the MAC group. The mean (SD) prophylaxis time was 17.2 h per day (4.0) in the MAC group and 7.5 h per day (8.8) in the IPC group, which was statistically significant (p < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings suggest that the MAC device can improve compliance with mechanical prophylaxis.</p>","PeriodicalId":51329,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trauma Nursing","volume":"31 2","pages":"97-103"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of a Novel Mechanical Venous Thromboembolism Compression Device in Trauma Patients: A Pilot Study.\",\"authors\":\"Kellie Girardot, Jan Powers, Lisa Morgan, Lisa Hollister\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/JTN.0000000000000779\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the fourth most common preventable hospital-acquired complication for hospitalized trauma patients. Mechanical prophylaxis, using sequential compression or intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) devices, is recommended alongside pharmacologic prophylaxis for VTE prevention. However, compliance with device use is a barrier that reduces the effectiveness of mechanical prophylaxis.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to determine whether using the Movement and Compressions (MAC) system compared with an IPC device impacts compliance with mechanical VTE prophylaxis in trauma patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study used a before-and-after design with historical control at a Level II trauma center with a convenience sample of adult trauma patients admitted to the intensive care unit or acute care floor for at least 24 h. We trialed the MAC device for 2 weeks in November and December 2022 with prospective data collection. Data collection for the historical control group occurred retrospectively using patients from a point-in-time audit of IPC device compliance from August and September of 2022.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 51 patients met inclusion criteria, with 34 patients in the IPC group and 17 patients in the MAC group. The mean (SD) prophylaxis time was 17.2 h per day (4.0) in the MAC group and 7.5 h per day (8.8) in the IPC group, which was statistically significant (p < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings suggest that the MAC device can improve compliance with mechanical prophylaxis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51329,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Trauma Nursing\",\"volume\":\"31 2\",\"pages\":\"97-103\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Trauma Nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/JTN.0000000000000779\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Trauma Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JTN.0000000000000779","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluation of a Novel Mechanical Venous Thromboembolism Compression Device in Trauma Patients: A Pilot Study.
Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the fourth most common preventable hospital-acquired complication for hospitalized trauma patients. Mechanical prophylaxis, using sequential compression or intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) devices, is recommended alongside pharmacologic prophylaxis for VTE prevention. However, compliance with device use is a barrier that reduces the effectiveness of mechanical prophylaxis.
Objective: This study aimed to determine whether using the Movement and Compressions (MAC) system compared with an IPC device impacts compliance with mechanical VTE prophylaxis in trauma patients.
Methods: This study used a before-and-after design with historical control at a Level II trauma center with a convenience sample of adult trauma patients admitted to the intensive care unit or acute care floor for at least 24 h. We trialed the MAC device for 2 weeks in November and December 2022 with prospective data collection. Data collection for the historical control group occurred retrospectively using patients from a point-in-time audit of IPC device compliance from August and September of 2022.
Results: A total of 51 patients met inclusion criteria, with 34 patients in the IPC group and 17 patients in the MAC group. The mean (SD) prophylaxis time was 17.2 h per day (4.0) in the MAC group and 7.5 h per day (8.8) in the IPC group, which was statistically significant (p < .001).
Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the MAC device can improve compliance with mechanical prophylaxis.
期刊介绍：
Journal of Trauma Nursing (JTN) is the official journal of the Society of Trauma Nurses.
The Society of Trauma Nurses believes that trauma is a disease impacting patients through the continuum of care. The mission of STN is to ensure optimal trauma care through education, collaboration, leadership and membership engagement. As the official publication of the Society of Trauma Nurses, the Journal of Trauma Nursing supports the STN’s strategic goals of effective communication, education and patient advocacy with original, peer-reviewed, research and evidence-based articles and information that reflect the highest standard of collaborative care for trauma patients.
The Journal of Trauma Nursing, through a commitment to editorial excellence, implements STN’s vision to improve practice and patient outcomes and to become the premiere global nursing organization across the trauma continuum.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
