Cargando…

Routine Application of Lung Ultrasonography in Respiratory Care: Knowledge, Perceptions, and Barriers to Instigate

BACKGROUND: Lung Ultrasound (LUS) had proved to be beneficial in detecting respiratory disorders at the bedside. Understanding the important role of Respiratory Therapists (RTs) in the critical care, we aimed to assess their knowledge, perceived relevance of LUS to clinical practice, current skill g...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sreedharan, Jithin K, Karthika, Manjush, Alqahtani, Jaber S, AlRabeeah, Saad M, Alnasser, Musallam, Alqahtani, Abdullah S, AlAhmari, Mohammed D, Zechariah Jebakumar, Arulanantham, AlEnezi, Meshal, Ghazwani, Abdullah A, Sara Mathew, Chris, Aldhahir, Abdulelah M, Nair, Suresh G
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9675578/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36411749
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S389013
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Lung Ultrasound (LUS) had proved to be beneficial in detecting respiratory disorders at the bedside. Understanding the important role of Respiratory Therapists (RTs) in the critical care, we aimed to assess their knowledge, perceived relevance of LUS to clinical practice, current skill gaps, and barriers to practice. METHODS: A cross-sectional, nationwide survey conducted among the RTs working in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The validated questionnaire included 4 sections; the demographics, knowledge and perceptions, applicability and self-reported proficiency, and barriers to the use of LUS by RTs. RESULTS: A total of 256 RTs across different regions of Saudi Arabia participated in this survey. 71.9% of them were males, and 46.1% of the participants were having <5 years of working experience. Only (18.1%) of the participants used LUS in their clinical practice, and (43%) of them had never received any training. 66% of the participants perceived LUS as an effective tool in the RT practice and immensely valuable in their daily practice (70%). A large proportion of RTs perceived LUS to be ineffective in calculating the lung score (50.4%), assessing the diaphragm (40.2%), and detecting pulmonary edema (38.3%). Calculating lung score has a lower mean score of 2.55 on both skills, and identifying its applicability to clinical practice with a mean score of 2.71 than other indications. Lack of training and curriculum (154/256; 60.2%) remains the top barrier that prevented RTs from using LUS in their clinical practice. CONCLUSION: While many RTs in Saudi Arabia perceived LUS as an effective tool in the RT practice, considerable competence gap exist, indicating the need for LUS training. There is a need for incorporating LUS into the curriculum of RT schools and promoting competency-based training for the current RT workforce to help improve patient care.