Cargando…

Physicians' and nurses' opinions on selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination: a survey

INTRODUCTION: Use of selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) and selective oropharyngeal decontamination (SOD) in intensive care patients has been controversial for years. Through regular questionnaires we determined expectations concerning SDD (effectiveness) and experience with SDD...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jongerden, Irene P, de Smet, Anne Marie G, Kluytmans, Jan A, te Velde, Leo F, Dennesen, Paul J, Wesselink, Ronald M, Bouw, Martijn P, Spanjersberg, Rob, Bogaers-Hofman, Diana, van der Meer, Nardo J, de Vries, Jaap W, Kaasjager, Karin, van Iterson, Mat, Kluge, Georg H, van der Werf, Tjip S, Harinck, Hubertus I, Bindels, Alexander J, Pickkers, Peter, Bonten, Marc J
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2945100/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20626848
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc9180
_version_ 1782187181447577600
author Jongerden, Irene P
de Smet, Anne Marie G
Kluytmans, Jan A
te Velde, Leo F
Dennesen, Paul J
Wesselink, Ronald M
Bouw, Martijn P
Spanjersberg, Rob
Bogaers-Hofman, Diana
van der Meer, Nardo J
de Vries, Jaap W
Kaasjager, Karin
van Iterson, Mat
Kluge, Georg H
van der Werf, Tjip S
Harinck, Hubertus I
Bindels, Alexander J
Pickkers, Peter
Bonten, Marc J
author_facet Jongerden, Irene P
de Smet, Anne Marie G
Kluytmans, Jan A
te Velde, Leo F
Dennesen, Paul J
Wesselink, Ronald M
Bouw, Martijn P
Spanjersberg, Rob
Bogaers-Hofman, Diana
van der Meer, Nardo J
de Vries, Jaap W
Kaasjager, Karin
van Iterson, Mat
Kluge, Georg H
van der Werf, Tjip S
Harinck, Hubertus I
Bindels, Alexander J
Pickkers, Peter
Bonten, Marc J
author_sort Jongerden, Irene P
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Use of selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) and selective oropharyngeal decontamination (SOD) in intensive care patients has been controversial for years. Through regular questionnaires we determined expectations concerning SDD (effectiveness) and experience with SDD and SOD (workload and patient friendliness), as perceived by nurses and physicians. METHODS: A survey was embedded in a group-randomized, controlled, cross-over multicenter study in the Netherlands in which, during three 6-month periods, SDD, SOD or standard care was used in random order. At the end of each study period, all nurses and physicians from participating intensive care units received study questionnaires. RESULTS: In all, 1024 (71%) of 1450 questionnaires were returned by nurses and 253 (82%) of 307 by physicians. Expectations that SDD improved patient outcome increased from 71% and 77% of respondents after the first two study periods to 82% at the end of the study (P = 0.004), with comparable trends among nurses and physicians. Nurses considered SDD to impose a higher workload (median 5.0, on a scale from 1 (low) to 10 (high)) than SOD (median 4.0) and standard care (median 2.0). Both SDD and SOD were considered less patient friendly than standard care (medians 4.0, 4.0 and 6.0, respectively). According to physicians, SDD had a higher workload (median 5.5) than SOD (median 5.0), which in turn was higher than standard care (median 2.5). Furthermore, physicians graded patient friendliness of standard care (median 8.0) higher than that of SDD and SOD (both median 6.0). CONCLUSIONS: Although perceived effectiveness of SDD increased as the trial proceeded, both among physicians and nurses, SOD and SDD were, as compared to standard care, considered to increase workload and to reduce patient friendliness. Therefore, education about the importance of oral care and on the effects of SDD and SOD on patient outcomes will be important when implementing these strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN35176830.
format Text
id pubmed-2945100
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-29451002010-09-25 Physicians' and nurses' opinions on selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination: a survey Jongerden, Irene P de Smet, Anne Marie G Kluytmans, Jan A te Velde, Leo F Dennesen, Paul J Wesselink, Ronald M Bouw, Martijn P Spanjersberg, Rob Bogaers-Hofman, Diana van der Meer, Nardo J de Vries, Jaap W Kaasjager, Karin van Iterson, Mat Kluge, Georg H van der Werf, Tjip S Harinck, Hubertus I Bindels, Alexander J Pickkers, Peter Bonten, Marc J Crit Care Research INTRODUCTION: Use of selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) and selective oropharyngeal decontamination (SOD) in intensive care patients has been controversial for years. Through regular questionnaires we determined expectations concerning SDD (effectiveness) and experience with SDD and SOD (workload and patient friendliness), as perceived by nurses and physicians. METHODS: A survey was embedded in a group-randomized, controlled, cross-over multicenter study in the Netherlands in which, during three 6-month periods, SDD, SOD or standard care was used in random order. At the end of each study period, all nurses and physicians from participating intensive care units received study questionnaires. RESULTS: In all, 1024 (71%) of 1450 questionnaires were returned by nurses and 253 (82%) of 307 by physicians. Expectations that SDD improved patient outcome increased from 71% and 77% of respondents after the first two study periods to 82% at the end of the study (P = 0.004), with comparable trends among nurses and physicians. Nurses considered SDD to impose a higher workload (median 5.0, on a scale from 1 (low) to 10 (high)) than SOD (median 4.0) and standard care (median 2.0). Both SDD and SOD were considered less patient friendly than standard care (medians 4.0, 4.0 and 6.0, respectively). According to physicians, SDD had a higher workload (median 5.5) than SOD (median 5.0), which in turn was higher than standard care (median 2.5). Furthermore, physicians graded patient friendliness of standard care (median 8.0) higher than that of SDD and SOD (both median 6.0). CONCLUSIONS: Although perceived effectiveness of SDD increased as the trial proceeded, both among physicians and nurses, SOD and SDD were, as compared to standard care, considered to increase workload and to reduce patient friendliness. Therefore, education about the importance of oral care and on the effects of SDD and SOD on patient outcomes will be important when implementing these strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN35176830. BioMed Central 2010 2010-07-13 /pmc/articles/PMC2945100/ /pubmed/20626848 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc9180 Text en Copyright ©2010 Jongerden et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Jongerden, Irene P
de Smet, Anne Marie G
Kluytmans, Jan A
te Velde, Leo F
Dennesen, Paul J
Wesselink, Ronald M
Bouw, Martijn P
Spanjersberg, Rob
Bogaers-Hofman, Diana
van der Meer, Nardo J
de Vries, Jaap W
Kaasjager, Karin
van Iterson, Mat
Kluge, Georg H
van der Werf, Tjip S
Harinck, Hubertus I
Bindels, Alexander J
Pickkers, Peter
Bonten, Marc J
Physicians' and nurses' opinions on selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination: a survey
title Physicians' and nurses' opinions on selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination: a survey
title_full Physicians' and nurses' opinions on selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination: a survey
title_fullStr Physicians' and nurses' opinions on selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination: a survey
title_full_unstemmed Physicians' and nurses' opinions on selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination: a survey
title_short Physicians' and nurses' opinions on selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination: a survey
title_sort physicians' and nurses' opinions on selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination: a survey
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2945100/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20626848
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc9180
work_keys_str_mv AT jongerdenirenep physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT desmetannemarieg physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT kluytmansjana physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT teveldeleof physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT dennesenpaulj physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT wesselinkronaldm physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT bouwmartijnp physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT spanjersbergrob physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT bogaershofmandiana physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT vandermeernardoj physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT devriesjaapw physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT kaasjagerkarin physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT vanitersonmat physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT klugegeorgh physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT vanderwerftjips physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT harinckhubertusi physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT bindelsalexanderj physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT pickkerspeter physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey
AT bontenmarcj physiciansandnursesopinionsonselectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationasurvey