{"title":"用于评估接受高流量鼻插管患者舒适度的工具：范围审查","authors":"Alessandro Galazzi, Matteo Petrei, Alvisa Palese","doi":"10.1016/j.iccn.2024.103719","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The aims were twofold: (a) to map tools documented in the literature to evaluate comfort among patients undergoing high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) treatment; and (b) to assess if the retrieved tools have been validated for this purpose.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A scoping review, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). In July 2023, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL and Cochrane Library were consulted. Studies assessing comfort in adult, paediatric, and neonatal patients undergoing HFNC were included.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Seventy-four articles were included, among which nine (12.2 %) investigated comfort as the primary aim. Twenty-five different tools were found, classifiable into 14 types, mostly unidimensional and originating from those measuring pain. The most widely used was the Visual Analogic Scale (n = 27, 35.6 %) followed by the Numerical Rating Scale (n = 11, 14.5 %) and less defined generic tools (n = 10, 13.2 %) with different metrics (e.g. 0–5, 0–10, 0–100). Only the General Comfort Questionnaire and the Comfort Scale were specifically validated for the assessment of comfort among adults and children, respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Although the comfort of patients undergoing HFNC is widely investigated in the literature, there is a scarcity of tools specifically validated in this field. Those used have been validated mainly to assess pain, suggesting the need to inform patients to prevent confusion while measuring comfort during HFNC and to develop more research in the field.</p></div><div><h3>Implications for clinical practice</h3><p>Comfort assessment is an important aspect of nursing care. Given the lack of validation studies in the field, efforts in research are recommended.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51322,"journal":{"name":"Intensive and Critical Care Nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0964339724001046/pdfft?md5=9ac9f7da0d4764a85b55a9b9b367f4d4&pid=1-s2.0-S0964339724001046-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tools used to assess comfort among patients undergoing high flow nasal cannula: A scoping review\",\"authors\":\"Alessandro Galazzi, Matteo Petrei, Alvisa Palese\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.iccn.2024.103719\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The aims were twofold: (a) to map tools documented in the literature to evaluate comfort among patients undergoing high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) treatment; and (b) to assess if the retrieved tools have been validated for this purpose.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A scoping review, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). In July 2023, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL and Cochrane Library were consulted. Studies assessing comfort in adult, paediatric, and neonatal patients undergoing HFNC were included.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Seventy-four articles were included, among which nine (12.2 %) investigated comfort as the primary aim. Twenty-five different tools were found, classifiable into 14 types, mostly unidimensional and originating from those measuring pain. The most widely used was the Visual Analogic Scale (n = 27, 35.6 %) followed by the Numerical Rating Scale (n = 11, 14.5 %) and less defined generic tools (n = 10, 13.2 %) with different metrics (e.g. 0–5, 0–10, 0–100). Only the General Comfort Questionnaire and the Comfort Scale were specifically validated for the assessment of comfort among adults and children, respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Although the comfort of patients undergoing HFNC is widely investigated in the literature, there is a scarcity of tools specifically validated in this field. Those used have been validated mainly to assess pain, suggesting the need to inform patients to prevent confusion while measuring comfort during HFNC and to develop more research in the field.</p></div><div><h3>Implications for clinical practice</h3><p>Comfort assessment is an important aspect of nursing care. Given the lack of validation studies in the field, efforts in research are recommended.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51322,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Intensive and Critical Care Nursing\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0964339724001046/pdfft?md5=9ac9f7da0d4764a85b55a9b9b367f4d4&pid=1-s2.0-S0964339724001046-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Intensive and Critical Care Nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0964339724001046\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intensive and Critical Care Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0964339724001046","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Tools used to assess comfort among patients undergoing high flow nasal cannula: A scoping review
Objective
The aims were twofold: (a) to map tools documented in the literature to evaluate comfort among patients undergoing high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) treatment; and (b) to assess if the retrieved tools have been validated for this purpose.
Methods
A scoping review, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). In July 2023, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL and Cochrane Library were consulted. Studies assessing comfort in adult, paediatric, and neonatal patients undergoing HFNC were included.
Results
Seventy-four articles were included, among which nine (12.2 %) investigated comfort as the primary aim. Twenty-five different tools were found, classifiable into 14 types, mostly unidimensional and originating from those measuring pain. The most widely used was the Visual Analogic Scale (n = 27, 35.6 %) followed by the Numerical Rating Scale (n = 11, 14.5 %) and less defined generic tools (n = 10, 13.2 %) with different metrics (e.g. 0–5, 0–10, 0–100). Only the General Comfort Questionnaire and the Comfort Scale were specifically validated for the assessment of comfort among adults and children, respectively.
Conclusion
Although the comfort of patients undergoing HFNC is widely investigated in the literature, there is a scarcity of tools specifically validated in this field. Those used have been validated mainly to assess pain, suggesting the need to inform patients to prevent confusion while measuring comfort during HFNC and to develop more research in the field.
Implications for clinical practice
Comfort assessment is an important aspect of nursing care. Given the lack of validation studies in the field, efforts in research are recommended.
期刊介绍：
The aims of Intensive and Critical Care Nursing are to promote excellence of care of critically ill patients by specialist nurses and their professional colleagues; to provide an international and interdisciplinary forum for the publication, dissemination and exchange of research findings, experience and ideas; to develop and enhance the knowledge, skills, attitudes and creative thinking essential to good critical care nursing practice. The journal publishes reviews, updates and feature articles in addition to original papers and significant preliminary communications. Articles may deal with any part of practice including relevant clinical, research, educational, psychological and technological aspects.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
