Implementation of a vascular access specialist team in a tertiary hospital: a cost-benefit analysis.

BACKGROUND: The use of peripherally inserted central catheters and midline catheters is growing due to their potential benefits. These devices can increase patient safety and satisfaction while reducing the use of resources. As a result, many hospitals are establishing vascular access specialist teams staffed by nurses who are trained in the insertion and maintenance of these catheters. The objective of the study is to evaluate previously to the implementation whether the benefits of introducing ultrasound-guided peripheral venous catheters, midline catheters and peripherally inserted central catheters compared to current practice by a vascular access specialist team outweigh their costs. METHODS: Cost-benefit analysis from the perspective of the healthcare provider based on administrative data. The study estimates the reduction in resources used when changing the current practice for the use of ultrasound-guided midline and PICC catheters, as well as the additional resources required for their use. RESULTS: The use of an ultrasound-guided device on peripherally inserted central carheter, results in a measurable resource reduction of approximately €31. When 3 peripheral venous catheters are replaced by an ultrasound-guided peripherally inserted central catheter, the saving is €63. Similarly, the use of an ultrasound-guided device on a midline catheter, results in a reduction of €16, while each ultrasound-guided midline catheter replacing 3 peripheral venous catheters results in a reduction of €96. CONCLUSION: The benefits of using ultrasound-guided midline and PICC catheters compared to current practice by introducing a vascular access specialist team trained in the implantation of ultrasound-guided catheters, outweigh its cost mainly because of the decrease in hospital stay due to the lowered risk of phebitis. These results motivate the implementation of the service, adding to previous experience suggesting that it is also preferable from the point of view of patient safety and satisfaction.

Impacto de la pandemia por COVID-19 en la implantación de una guía de buenas prácticas sobre las lesiones por presión / Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the implementation of best practice guidelines on pressure injuries

Objetivo: Evaluar el impacto de la COVID-19 en la implantaciónde la Guía de Buenas Prácticas clínicas de la Registered Nurses’Association of Ontario, de valoración del riesgo y prevención de laslesiones por presión sobre los indicadores de calidad asistencial enla Unidad de Medicina Interna del Hospital Universitari GermansTrias i Pujol. Metodología: Estudio observacional, analítico, de 2cohortes retrospectivas, que compara los indicadores de calidad pre ypostimplementación de 2017 con los del año 2021. Explotación dedatos de forma retrospectiva y pseudoanonimizada. Análisis descriptivounivariante, así como inferencial para el contraste de hipótesis deestudio. En todos los casos se utilizaron aproximaciones bilaterales,siendo el nivel de significación del 5% (α = 0,05). Resultados: Seincluyeron 946 sujetos, de los que el 49,9% fueron hombres y el50,1% mujeres. La media de edad fue de 75 años. La incidencia delesiones por presión fue del 8,1% en 2017 y del 8,9% en 2021, sinexistir evidencias estadísticamente significativas (p = 0,8). Respectoa la proporción de lesiones por presión de origen nosocomial,también se observó un considerable aumento, que fue del 27,5% en2017 y del 60% en 2021, aunque tampoco se hallaron diferenciasestadísticamente significativas (p = 0,094). Sin embargo, en cuantoal riesgo de presentar lesiones por presión y de su aparición, sí que seobservaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en ambos años (p< 0,001 en 2017, y p = 0,011 en 2021). Conclusiones: La pandemiaobligó a detener el proceso de implantación de las guías de buenasprácticas, repercutiendo en los indicadores de calidad asistencial. (AU)

Objective: To assess the impact of COVID-19 on theimplementation of the Risk Assessment and Prevention ofPressure Ulcers Best Practice Guideline (BPG) of the RegisteredNurses’ Association of Ontario, in quality indicators in thegeneral internal medicine unit of the Hospital UniversitariGermans Trias i Pujol. Methodology: Observational studyof 2 retrospective cohorts, comparing the pre- and postimplementation quality indicators of 2017 with those ofthe year 2021. A pseudonymized data exploitation wasconducted for subsequent univariate descriptive analysis, aswell as inferential analysis and hypothesis contrasting. Bilateralapproaches were used in all cases, with a significance level of 5%(α = 0.05). Results: A total of 946 individuals were included, ofwhich 49.9% were men and 50.1% were women. The mean agewas 75 years. The incidence of PI was 8.1% in 2017 and 8.9%in 2021, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.8).Regarding the proportion of hospital-acquired PI, a considerableincrease was also observed, being 27.5% in 2017 and 60% in2021, although no statistically significant differences were foundeither (p = 0.094). However, regarding the risk of presentingPI and their incidence, statistically significant differences wereobserved in both years (p < 0.001 in 2017, and p = 0.011 in2021). Conclusions: The pandemic made it necessary to stopthe BPG implementation process, impacting negatively on thequality of care indicators. (AU)

Barriers and facilitators involved in standardised care plan individualisation process in acute hospitalisation wards: A grounded theory approach.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and classify the barriers and facilitators of the individualisation process of the standardised care plan in hospitalisation wards. BACKGROUND: The administration of individualised care is one of the features of the nursing process. Care plans are the structured record of the diagnosis, planning and evaluation stages of the nursing process. Although the creation of standardised care plan has made recording easier, it is still necessary to record the individualisation of the care. It is important to study the elements that influence the individualisation process from the nurses' perspective. DESIGN: Qualitative study with the grounded theory approach developed by Strauss and Corbin. METHODS: Thirty-nine nurses from three hospitals participated by way of theoretical sampling. In-depth interviews were conducted, as well as participant observation, document analysis and focus group discussion. The analysis consisted of open, axial and selective coding until data saturation was reached. EQUATOR guidelines for qualitative research (COREQ) were applied. RESULTS: For both barriers and facilitators, three thematic categories emerged related to organisational, professional and individual aspects. The identified barriers included routines acquired in the wards, the tradition of narrative records, lack of knowledge and limited interest in individualisation. The identified facilitators included holding clinical care sessions, use of standardised care plan and an interface terminology, the nurse's expertise and willingness to individualise. CONCLUSION: The individualisation process of the standardised care plan involves multiple barriers and facilitators, which influence its degree of accuracy. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Implementing strategies at an organisational level, professional level and individual level to improve the way the process is carried out would encourage individualising the standardised care plan in a manner that is consistent with the needs of the patient and family; it would improve the quality of care and patient satisfaction.

Individualization process of the standardized care plan in acute care hospitalization units: Study protocol.

AIM: To understand the individualization process of the standardized care plan (SCP) that nurses design for hospitalized patients. BACKGROUND: To apply the nursing process, it is advisable to use SCP to standardize the diagnosis, planning and evaluation stages. However, the fundamental element of this methodology is the individualization of the care plan. DESIGN: A qualitative study, framed within the constructivist paradigm and applying the Grounded Theory method, in accordance with Strauss and Corbin's approach. METHODS: Multicentre study. Theoretical sampling with maximum variation will be used. The data collection will consist of: in-depth individual interviews, participant observation, document analysis, focus group, and the questionnaires for Critical Thinking Assessment in relation to clinical practice and Nursing Competency Assessment for hospital nurses. The qualitative data will be analysed according to the constant comparative method of Strauss and Corbin's Grounded Theory, which involves performing open, axial and selective coding. The questionnaire results will be used to make a qualitative analysis that will consist of a triangulation between the level of critical thinking, level of expertise and record of the individualization process performed by the nurses. This protocol was approved in July 2015. DISCUSSION: By knowing the possible stages used in the individualization of a SCP, together with the elements that facilitate or hinder said individualization and nurses' attitudes and experiences regarding this phenomenon, it could help direct improvement strategies in the standardization and individualization process. In addition to recommendations for teaching and research.