| Primary Author: | Yoshikazu Kojima, RN |
| Organization | Tokai University |
Abstract
Purpose
Examine common and uncommon methods to clarify how suctioning is implemented.
Background
It is important for patients with endotracheal suctioning to keep the airway clear; therefore, there is a need to examine the performance of suctioning tehchniques which are safety, invasive and effective. Although guidelines have been created, they are often passed from senior to junior staff members conducted in continuing education facilities in both hospitals and workshops. Therefore the role and influence of the Certified Intensive Care Nurse who is qualified to lead the intensive care clinical and critical care practice is essential.
In clinical settings, the two suction methods of traditional and evidence based practices exist together.
Materials & Methods
Self-designed questionnaire survey. The questionnaire requested the recognition of 295 nurses out
of 471 recognized nurses overall. The recognized nurses are Japanese Certified Intensive Care Nurses.
Results
- There were 151 qualified answers out of the 295 research questionnaires.
- Following is the result of the comparison of two prefered methods to the current guideline practices.
- Guideline performance: There were 71(47%) of respondents who answered “Basically, we don’t use the nebulizer”
- Accept the guideline but do not prefer them (Method which is not prefered by the guideline but allows it.)
Conclusion
Of the two unified methods more than 80% of the nurses agreed that shortening the suctioning time and assisting inspiration was benificial. They considered shortening the suctioning time decreased pain.
Methods which 20% to 79% of nurses agreed that the insertion depth of a suctioning tube and the existence of
turning the tube, and its implementation based on evidence from experiences which differed from the guidelines. Therefore, evidence suggests that there is no common shared technique. There were also some misunderstandings in terms of the guidelines and a lack of skill assessment.
Bibliography
- AARC. Clinical Practice Guidelines; 55, 758-64.2010
- The Japanese Respiratory Society. Guidelines of Endotracheal suctioning; 6.812-23.2008
- Tina Day et al. Intensive and Critical Care of Nursing;55.758-64.2010
© Improvement Science Research Network, 2012
The ISRN published this as received and with permission from the author(s).