scholarly journals Medical intensive care unit clinician attitudes and perceived barriers towards early mobilization of critically ill patients: a cross-sectional survey study

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah E Jolley ◽  
Janet Regan-Baggs ◽  
Robert P Dickson ◽  
Catherine L Hough
Author(s):  
Aishwarya Gatty ◽  
Stephen Rajan Samuel ◽  
Gopala Krishna Alaparthi ◽  
Dattatray Prabhu ◽  
Madhusudan Upadya ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hailemariam Getachew Tessema ◽  
Girmay Fitiwi Lema ◽  
Nebiyu Mesfin ◽  
Demeke Yilkal Fentie ◽  
Nurhussien Rizke Arefaynie

Abstract Background: Intensive care unit (ICU) is a multidisciplinary staffed and specially equipped area of a hospital dedicated to providea care for patient with life-threatening illness. Provision of intensive care services to critically ill patients is a global enterprise. The care is advancing but in resource-limited settings, it is lagging far behind and ICU mortality is still higher due to various reasons. Objective: We aimed to determine the admission patterns, clinical outcomes and associated factors among patients admitted medical intensive care unit (MICU). Results: A total of 738 patients were admitted to MICU during September 2015- April 2019. Two hundred thirty four patients had incomplete data on the registries and their charts could not be located. So that, 504 (68%) of all ICU admissions had complete data and were analyzed. Out of the 504 patients, 268 (53.2%) patients were females. Cardiovascular disease 182(36.1%) was the commonest categorical admission diagnosis. The overall mortality rate of the MICU was 38.7 %. In the multivariate analysis, mortality was associated with need for mechanical ventilation (AOR=5.87, 95% CI: 3.24 - 10.65) and abnormal mental status at admission (AOR = 2.8.8, 95% CI: 1.83-4.29). Patients who stayed less than four days in MICU are 5 times more likely to dies than who stayed(AOR= 5.58, 95% CI: 3.58- 8.69). Therefore, we recommend improving the acute critical care through the expansion of the care, supply emergency equipment’s and medications and implementation of admission criteria protocols and other local guidelines. Key words: admission, intensive care unit, Length of stay, Mortality, Outcome


2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 159-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip J. Choi ◽  
Farr A. Curlin ◽  
Christopher E. Cox

AbstractObjectiveStudies have shown that when religious and spiritual concerns are addressed by the medical team, patients are more satisfied with their care and have lower healthcare costs. However, little is known about how intensive care unit (ICU) clinicians address these concerns. The objective of this study was to determine how ICU clinicians address the religious and spiritual needs of patients and families.MethodWe performed a cross-sectional survey study of ICU physicians, nurses, and advance practice providers (APPs) to understand their attitudes and beliefs about addressing the religious and spiritual needs of ICU patients and families. Each question was designed on a 4- to 5-point Likert scale. A total of 219 surveys were collected over a 4-month period.ResultA majority of clinicians agreed that it is their responsibility to address the religious/spiritual needs of patients. A total of 79% of attendings, 74% of fellows, 89% of nurses, and 83% of APPs agreed with this statement. ICU clinicians also feel comfortable talking to patients about their religious/spiritual concerns. In practice, few clinicians frequently address religious/spiritual concerns. Only 14% of attendings, 3% of fellows, 26% of nurses, and 17% of APPs say they frequently ask patients about their religious/spiritual needs.Significance of resultsThis study shows that ICU clinicians see it as their role to address the religious and spiritual needs of their patients, and report feeling comfortable talking about these issues. Despite this, a minority of clinicians regularly address religious and spiritual needs in clinical practice. This highlights a potential deficit in comprehensive critical care as outlined by many national guidelines.


Author(s):  
Jinyi He ◽  
Hong Li ◽  
Xiaohuan Chen ◽  
Shuang Jin ◽  
Meirong Chen ◽  
...  

This study was undertaken to investigate and analyze noise pollution in a large Chinese governmental hospital’s medical intensive care unit and compare to the WHO guidelines.This cross-sectional study was conducted in a MICU at a public governmental teaching hospital in Fujian province between July and August of 2017. A WENSN® WS1361 Integrated Sound Level Meter (China) was used for continuous every five seconds one week noise levels recording. After this measurement, the decibel meter was used for recording different location of isolation rooms and open bays, including occupied and unoccupied patient, and recording sound events occurs in the ICU to identify sources of noise. Peak and average noise levels were obtained from the meter, and data were downloaded from the WS1361 into a laptop computer. The measured mean equivalent sound pressure levels (L) and standard Aeq deviation over one week period were 66.64±7.57 dB(A), with acute spikes reaching 119.7 dB(A), the average sound level for a 24 hour period in a work day was 68.03±5.07 dB(A). These are higher than the current daytime environmental noise limit of 40-45 decibels in China and WHO. Mean work day noise was significantly louder than weekend time, there was a significant difference in work days and weekend (t=16.85;P=0.000).There was a statistical difference between the day time and night time shifts (t=34.67;P=0.000). The isolation rooms were significantly quieter than the open-bay rooms(t=46.15; p=0.00), sound levels in the occupied and unoccupied rooms also had significant difference(t=17.26; P=0.000).Two types of noise resources, including twenty kinds sources were identified and measured, mean noise levels ranged from of 61.33 to 79.21 dB(A). This study shows noise levels in intensive care units were exceeded the recommended. The study of the influence of noise on patient and staff is needed, and noise reduction strategies must be conduct in ICU.


2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-50
Author(s):  
G.S. Shrestha ◽  
B.P. Parajuli ◽  
S.P. Acharya ◽  
A. Banstola ◽  
B. Upadhyay ◽  
...  

Introduction Severe sepsis and septic shock is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. The burden is higher and the outcome is dismal in the low and middle income countries.Objective This study aims to evaluate the knowledge about severe sepsis and septic shock among the medical officers of emergency department and intensive care unit in Nepal. It is a cross-sectional survey study.Methodology The medical officers working in emergency department and intensive care unit were asked to fill up the survey questionnaire, which contained the questions related to the demographics of the participant, about the knowledge of sepsis and the hindrances behind the effective management of septic patients. The percentage of correct answers for each question and average correct response for all the questions were analyzed.Results Seventy medical officers from twenty-four hospitals across the country were enrolled in the study. Among them, 39 were working in the emergency department and 31 were working in the intensive care unit. For the individual questions, the percentage of correct answers varied from 8.57% to 82.86% (average 48.16%). As per the response of the participants, lack of knowledge about sepsis and management guidelines, lack of experience for management of sepsis and lack of investigation facilities were considered to be the major barriers for effective management of septic patients.Conclusions Knowledge and understanding about severe sepsis and septic shock among the medical officers of emergency department and intensive care unit in Nepal is sub-optimal. To improve the outcome of septic patients, efforts should be made to increase the understanding among these first-line health care workers by implementing regular and mandatory training programs.Birat Journal of Health Sciences 2016 1(1): 47-50


2016 ◽  
Vol 109 (6) ◽  
pp. 342-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Sigler ◽  
Kenneth Nugent ◽  
Raed Alalawi ◽  
Kavitha Selvan ◽  
Jim Tseng ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document