Cargando…
COVID-19 Intensive Care—Evaluation of Public Information Sources and Current Standards of Care in German Intensive Care Units: A Cross Sectional Online Survey on Intensive Care Staff in Germany
Backround: In February 2021, the first formal evidence and consensus-based (S3) guidelines for the inpatient treatment of patients with COVID-19 were published in Germany and have been updated twice during 2021. The aim of the present study is to re-evaluate the dissemination pathways and strategies...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9319015/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35885841 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10071315 |
_version_ | 1784755445674541056 |
---|---|
author | Werner, Anne Popp, Maria Fichtner, Falk Holzmann-Littig, Christopher Kranke, Peter Steckelberg, Anke Lühnen, Julia Redlich, Lisa Marie Dickel, Steffen Grimm, Clemens Moerer, Onnen Nothacker, Monika Seeber, Christian |
author_facet | Werner, Anne Popp, Maria Fichtner, Falk Holzmann-Littig, Christopher Kranke, Peter Steckelberg, Anke Lühnen, Julia Redlich, Lisa Marie Dickel, Steffen Grimm, Clemens Moerer, Onnen Nothacker, Monika Seeber, Christian |
author_sort | Werner, Anne |
collection | PubMed |
description | Backround: In February 2021, the first formal evidence and consensus-based (S3) guidelines for the inpatient treatment of patients with COVID-19 were published in Germany and have been updated twice during 2021. The aim of the present study is to re-evaluate the dissemination pathways and strategies for ICU staff (first evaluation in December 2020 when previous versions of consensus-based guidelines (S2k) were published) and question selected aspects of guideline adherence of standard care for patients with COVID-19 in the ICU. Methods: We conducted an anonymous online survey among German intensive care staff from 11 October 2021 to 11 November 2021. We distributed the survey via e-mail in intensive care facilities and requested redirection to additional intensive care staff (snowball sampling). Results: There was a difference between the professional groups in the number, selection and qualitative assessment of information sources about COVID-19. Standard operating procedures were most frequently used by all occupational groups and received a high quality rating. Physicians preferred sources for active information search (e.g., medical journals), while nurses predominantly used passive consumable sources (e.g., every-day media). Despite differences in usage behaviour, the sources were rated similarly in terms of the quality of the information on COVID-19. The trusted organizations have not changed over time. The use of guidelines was frequently stated and highly recommended. The majority of the participants reported guideline-compliant treatment. Nevertheless, there were certain variations in the use of medication as well as the criteria chosen for discontinuing non-invasive ventilation (NIV) compared to guideline recommendations. Conclusions: An adequate external source of information for nursing staff is lacking, the usual sources of physicians are only appropriate for the minority of nursing staff. The self-reported use of guidelines is high. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9319015 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93190152022-07-27 COVID-19 Intensive Care—Evaluation of Public Information Sources and Current Standards of Care in German Intensive Care Units: A Cross Sectional Online Survey on Intensive Care Staff in Germany Werner, Anne Popp, Maria Fichtner, Falk Holzmann-Littig, Christopher Kranke, Peter Steckelberg, Anke Lühnen, Julia Redlich, Lisa Marie Dickel, Steffen Grimm, Clemens Moerer, Onnen Nothacker, Monika Seeber, Christian Healthcare (Basel) Article Backround: In February 2021, the first formal evidence and consensus-based (S3) guidelines for the inpatient treatment of patients with COVID-19 were published in Germany and have been updated twice during 2021. The aim of the present study is to re-evaluate the dissemination pathways and strategies for ICU staff (first evaluation in December 2020 when previous versions of consensus-based guidelines (S2k) were published) and question selected aspects of guideline adherence of standard care for patients with COVID-19 in the ICU. Methods: We conducted an anonymous online survey among German intensive care staff from 11 October 2021 to 11 November 2021. We distributed the survey via e-mail in intensive care facilities and requested redirection to additional intensive care staff (snowball sampling). Results: There was a difference between the professional groups in the number, selection and qualitative assessment of information sources about COVID-19. Standard operating procedures were most frequently used by all occupational groups and received a high quality rating. Physicians preferred sources for active information search (e.g., medical journals), while nurses predominantly used passive consumable sources (e.g., every-day media). Despite differences in usage behaviour, the sources were rated similarly in terms of the quality of the information on COVID-19. The trusted organizations have not changed over time. The use of guidelines was frequently stated and highly recommended. The majority of the participants reported guideline-compliant treatment. Nevertheless, there were certain variations in the use of medication as well as the criteria chosen for discontinuing non-invasive ventilation (NIV) compared to guideline recommendations. Conclusions: An adequate external source of information for nursing staff is lacking, the usual sources of physicians are only appropriate for the minority of nursing staff. The self-reported use of guidelines is high. MDPI 2022-07-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9319015/ /pubmed/35885841 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10071315 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Werner, Anne Popp, Maria Fichtner, Falk Holzmann-Littig, Christopher Kranke, Peter Steckelberg, Anke Lühnen, Julia Redlich, Lisa Marie Dickel, Steffen Grimm, Clemens Moerer, Onnen Nothacker, Monika Seeber, Christian COVID-19 Intensive Care—Evaluation of Public Information Sources and Current Standards of Care in German Intensive Care Units: A Cross Sectional Online Survey on Intensive Care Staff in Germany |
title | COVID-19 Intensive Care—Evaluation of Public Information Sources and Current Standards of Care in German Intensive Care Units: A Cross Sectional Online Survey on Intensive Care Staff in Germany |
title_full | COVID-19 Intensive Care—Evaluation of Public Information Sources and Current Standards of Care in German Intensive Care Units: A Cross Sectional Online Survey on Intensive Care Staff in Germany |
title_fullStr | COVID-19 Intensive Care—Evaluation of Public Information Sources and Current Standards of Care in German Intensive Care Units: A Cross Sectional Online Survey on Intensive Care Staff in Germany |
title_full_unstemmed | COVID-19 Intensive Care—Evaluation of Public Information Sources and Current Standards of Care in German Intensive Care Units: A Cross Sectional Online Survey on Intensive Care Staff in Germany |
title_short | COVID-19 Intensive Care—Evaluation of Public Information Sources and Current Standards of Care in German Intensive Care Units: A Cross Sectional Online Survey on Intensive Care Staff in Germany |
title_sort | covid-19 intensive care—evaluation of public information sources and current standards of care in german intensive care units: a cross sectional online survey on intensive care staff in germany |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9319015/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35885841 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10071315 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT werneranne covid19intensivecareevaluationofpublicinformationsourcesandcurrentstandardsofcareingermanintensivecareunitsacrosssectionalonlinesurveyonintensivecarestaffingermany AT poppmaria covid19intensivecareevaluationofpublicinformationsourcesandcurrentstandardsofcareingermanintensivecareunitsacrosssectionalonlinesurveyonintensivecarestaffingermany AT fichtnerfalk covid19intensivecareevaluationofpublicinformationsourcesandcurrentstandardsofcareingermanintensivecareunitsacrosssectionalonlinesurveyonintensivecarestaffingermany AT holzmannlittigchristopher covid19intensivecareevaluationofpublicinformationsourcesandcurrentstandardsofcareingermanintensivecareunitsacrosssectionalonlinesurveyonintensivecarestaffingermany AT krankepeter covid19intensivecareevaluationofpublicinformationsourcesandcurrentstandardsofcareingermanintensivecareunitsacrosssectionalonlinesurveyonintensivecarestaffingermany AT steckelberganke covid19intensivecareevaluationofpublicinformationsourcesandcurrentstandardsofcareingermanintensivecareunitsacrosssectionalonlinesurveyonintensivecarestaffingermany AT luhnenjulia covid19intensivecareevaluationofpublicinformationsourcesandcurrentstandardsofcareingermanintensivecareunitsacrosssectionalonlinesurveyonintensivecarestaffingermany AT redlichlisamarie covid19intensivecareevaluationofpublicinformationsourcesandcurrentstandardsofcareingermanintensivecareunitsacrosssectionalonlinesurveyonintensivecarestaffingermany AT dickelsteffen covid19intensivecareevaluationofpublicinformationsourcesandcurrentstandardsofcareingermanintensivecareunitsacrosssectionalonlinesurveyonintensivecarestaffingermany AT grimmclemens covid19intensivecareevaluationofpublicinformationsourcesandcurrentstandardsofcareingermanintensivecareunitsacrosssectionalonlinesurveyonintensivecarestaffingermany AT moereronnen covid19intensivecareevaluationofpublicinformationsourcesandcurrentstandardsofcareingermanintensivecareunitsacrosssectionalonlinesurveyonintensivecarestaffingermany AT nothackermonika covid19intensivecareevaluationofpublicinformationsourcesandcurrentstandardsofcareingermanintensivecareunitsacrosssectionalonlinesurveyonintensivecarestaffingermany AT seeberchristian covid19intensivecareevaluationofpublicinformationsourcesandcurrentstandardsofcareingermanintensivecareunitsacrosssectionalonlinesurveyonintensivecarestaffingermany |