Emergency nurses' experiences of the implementation of early goal directed fluid resuscitation therapy in the management of sepsis: a qualitative study

How can scope of practice be described and conceptualised in medical and health professions? A systematic review for scoping and content analysis

BACKGROUND

The term scope of practice (SOP) refers to the limits of a health professional's knowledge, skills and experience and reflects all tasks and activities they undertake within the context of their professional role. Inconsistency in definitions of SOP contributes to uncertainty and confusion regarding professional practice boundaries and potentially impacts societal access to safe, effective and efficient healthcare options. The aim of this paper is to understand the conceptual diversity that may exist in terminology used to describe medical, nursing/midwifery and allied health SOP within an Australian practice context exemplar.

METHODS

A systematic review for scoping and content analysis of SOP definitions and concepts, involving inductive thematic analysis and synthesis of published and grey literature.

RESULTS

The initial search strategy yielded 11,863 hits, of which 379 were suitable for inclusion. Data coding identified various SOP terms and definitions and the emergence of six, conceptual elements underpinning the theoretical construct. These were subsequently proposed as a preliminary conceptual model ('Solar') to explain how the six conceptual elements may be applied across various professions, clinical settings and jurisdictions to better understand and address current and evolving SOP issues.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study highlight limited consistency in SOP definitions and terminology within a single jurisdiction, and the conceptual complexity of the underlying theoretical construct. Further research is required to build on the proposed 'Solar' conceptual model and create a universal SOP definition across jurisdictions, to enhance understanding of the importance of SOP to workforce policy, clinical governance, service models and patient outcomes.

Missed nursing care in emergency departments: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Patient safety is a global health priority. Errors of omission, such as missed nursing care in hospitals, are frequent and may lead to adverse events. Emergency departments (ED) are especially vulnerable to patient safety errors, and the significance missed nursing care has in this context is not as well known as in other contexts.

AIM

The aim of this scoping review was to summarize and disseminate research about missed nursing care in the context of EDs.

METHOD

A scoping review following the framework suggested by Arksey and O'Malley was used to (1) identify the research question; (2) identify relevant studies; (3) select studies; (4) chart the data; (5) collate, summarize, and report the results; and (6) consultation.

RESULTS

In total, 20 themes were derived from the 55 included studies. Missed or delayed assessments or other fundamental care were examples of missed nursing care characteristics. EDs not staffed or dimensioned in relation to the patient load were identified as a cause of missed nursing care in most included studies. Clinical deteriorations and medication errors were described in the included studies in relation to patient safety and quality of care deficiencies. Registered nurses also expressed that missed nursing care was undignified and unsafe.

CONCLUSION

The findings from this scoping review indicate that patients' fundamental needs are not met in the ED, mainly because of the patient load and how the ED is designed. According to registered nurses, missed nursing care is perceived as undignified and unsafe.

Facilitators and barriers of appropriate and timely initial fluid administration in sepsis: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Sepsis is a medical emergency requiring prompt recognition, and early administration of intravenous fluids and antibiotics. While compliance with appropriate and timely administration of intravenous fluids has been found to be poor, the reasons are not well understood. Therefore, we have explored the experiences and perceptions of emergency nurses and medical officers from four hospitals to identify the associated facilitators and barriers.

METHODS

Qualitative design incorporating six focus group discussions and thematic analysis of data. A hybrid approach using both inductive and deductive reasoning was used.

FINDINGS

Four key themes were developed: 1. Overcrowding and understaffing threaten appropriate fluid management in sepsis; 2. Variations in clinical practice results in suboptimal fluid management; 3. Challenges with clinical recognition of sepsis impedes timely fluid administration; 4. Top-down approach is necessary to improve fluid management.

CONCLUSION

Themes highlighted the specific challenges associated with fluid administration in sepsis in the emergency department setting providing potential strategies to be implemented to improve practice and ultimately patient outcomes.

The association between out of hours burn centre admission and in-hospital outcomes in patients with severe burns

INTRODUCTION

Patients with severe burns (≥20 % total body surface area [TBSA]) have specific and time sensitive needs on arrival to the burn centre. Burn care systems in Australia and New Zealand are organised differently during weekday business hours compared to overnight and weekends. The aims of this study were to compare the profile of adult patients with severe burns admitted during business hours with patients admitted out of hours and to quantify the association between time of admission and in-hospital outcomes in the Australian and New Zealand context.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the Burns Registry of Australia and New Zealand for adults (≥18 years) with severe burns admitted to Australian or New Zealand burn centres between July 2016 and June 2020. Differences in patient profiles, clinical management, and in-hospital outcomes were investigated. Univariable and multivariable logistic and linear regression models were used to quantify associations between time of admission and in-hospital outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

We found 623 patients eligible for inclusion. Most patients were admitted out of hours (69.2 %), their median age was 42 years, and most were male (78 %). The median size burn was 30 % TBSA and 32 % of patients had an inhalation injury. A greater proportion of patients admitted out of hours had alcohol and/or drugs involved with injury compared to patients admitted during business hours. No other differences between groups were observed. Patients in both groups had similar odds of dying in hospital (Odds Ratio [OR], 95 % Confidence Interval [95 %CI] 1.49 [0.64, 3.48]), developing acute kidney injury within 72 h (OR, 95 %CI 0.58 [0.32, 1.07]), or sepsis (OR, 95 %CI 1.04 [0.46, 2.35]). No association was found between time of admission and hospital (%, 95 %CI 1.00 [0.82, 1.23]) nor intensive care length of stay (%, 95 %CI 0.97 [0.73, 1.27]).

DISCUSSION

In this first Australian and/or New Zealand study to explore the association between time of admission and burn patient in-hospital outcomes, out of hours admission was not associated with patient outcomes of interest.

CONCLUSION

These findings support current models of care in Australian and New Zealand burn centres, however further investigation is required. Nonetheless, given most severe burns patients arrive out of hours to burn the centre, it is plausible that out of hours availability of senior burn clinicians will improve patient care and safety resilience within burn care systems.

Sepsis assessment and management in critically Ill adults: A systematic review

Background

Early assessment and management of patients with sepsis can significantly reduce its high mortality rates and improve patient outcomes and quality of life.

Objectives

The purposes of this review are to: (1) explore nurses’ knowledge, attitude, practice, and perceived barriers and facilitators related to early recognition and management of sepsis, (2) explore different interventions directed at nurses to improve sepsis management.

Methods

A systematic review method according to the PRISMA guidelines was used. An electronic search was conducted in March 2021 on several databases using combinations of keywords. Two researchers independently selected and screened the articles according to the eligibility criteria.

Results

Nurses reported an adequate of knowledge in certain areas of sepsis assessment and management in critically ill adult patients. Also, nurses’ attitudes toward sepsis assessment and management were positive in general, but they reported some misconceptions regarding antibiotic use for patients with sepsis, and that sepsis was inevitable for critically ill adult patients. Furthermore, nurses reported they either were not well-prepared or confident enough to effectively recognize and promptly manage sepsis. Also, there are different kinds of nurses’ perceived barriers and facilitators related to sepsis assessment and management: nurse, patient, physician, and system-related. There are different interventions directed at nurses to help in improving nurses’ knowledge, attitudes, and practice of sepsis assessment and management. These interventions include education sessions, simulation, decision support or screening tools for sepsis, and evidence-based treatment protocols/guidelines.

Discussion

Our findings could help hospital managers in developing continuous education and staff development training programs on assessing and managing sepsis in critical care patients.

Conclusion

Nurses have poor to good knowledge, practices, and attitudes toward sepsis as well as report many barriers related to sepsis management in adult critically ill patients. Despite all education interventions, no study has collectively targeted critical care nurses’ knowledge, attitudes, and practice of sepsis management.

Identifying factors associated with intravenous fluid administration in patients with sepsis presenting to the emergency department: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Appropriate and timely administration of intravenous fluids to patients with sepsis-induced hypotension is one of the mainstays of sepsis management in the emergency department (ED), however, fluid resuscitation remains an ongoing challenge in ED. Our study has been undertaken with two specific aims: firstly, for patients with sepsis, to identify factors associated with receiving intravenous fluids while in the ED; and, secondly to identify determinants associated with the actual time to fluid administration.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective multicentre cohort study of adult ED presentations between October 2018 and May 2019 in four metropolitan hospitals in Western Sydney, Australia. Patients meeting pre-specified criteria for sepsis and septic shock and treated with antibiotics within the first 24 h of presentation were included. Multivariable models were used to identify factors associated with fluid administration in sepsis.

Results

Four thousand one hundred forty-six patients met the inclusion criteria, among these 2,300 (55.5%) patients with sepsis received intravenous fluids in ED. The median time to fluid administration from the time of diagnosis of sepsis was 1.6 h (Interquartile Range (IQR) 0.5 to 3.8), and the median volume of fluids administered was 1,100 mL (IQR 750 to 2058). Factors associated with patients receiving fluids were younger age (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.05, 95% Confidence Interval (CI (1.03 to 1.07), p < 0.001); lower systolic blood pressure (OR 1.11, 95% CI (1.08 to 1.13), p < 0.001); presenting to smaller hospital (OR 1.48, 95% CI (1.25 to 1.75, p < 0.001) and a Clinical Rapid Response alert activated (OR 1.64, 95% CI (1.28 to 2.11), p < 0.001). Patients with Triage Category 1 received fluids 101.22 min earlier (95% CI (59.3 to131.2), p < 0.001) and those with Category 2 received fluids 43.58 min earlier (95% CI (9.6 to 63.1), p < 0.001) compared to patients with Triage Category 3–5. Other factors associated with receiving fluids earlier included septic shock (-49.37 min (95% CI (-86.4 to -12.4), p < 0.001)); each mmol/L increase in serum lactate levels (-9.0 min, 95% CI (-15.7 to -2.3), p < 0.001) and presenting to smaller hospitals (-74.61 min, 95% CI (-94.0 to -55.3), p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Younger age, greater severity of sepsis, and presenting to a smaller hospital increased the probability of receiving fluids and receiving it earlier. Recognition of these factors may assist in effective implementation of sepsis management guidelines which should translate into better patient outcomes. Future studies are needed to identify other associated factors that we have not explored.

Early fluid bolus in adults with sepsis in the emergency department: a systematic review, meta-analysis and narrative synthesis

Background

Early intravenous fluids for patients with sepsis presenting with hypoperfusion or shock in the emergency department remains one of the key recommendations of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines to reduce mortality. However, compliance with the recommendation remains poor. While several interventions have been implemented to improve early fluid administration as part of sepsis protocols, the extent to which they have improved compliance with fluid resuscitation is unknown. The factors associated with the lack of compliance are also poorly understood.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review, meta-analysis and narrative review to investigate the effectiveness of interventions in emergency departments in improving compliance with early fluid administration and examine the non-interventional facilitators and barriers that may influence appropriate fluid administration in adults with sepsis. We searched MEDLINE Ovid/PubMed, Ovid EMBASE, CINAHL, and SCOPUS databases for studies of any design to April 2021. We synthesised results from the studies reporting effectiveness of interventions in a meta-analysis and conducted a narrative synthesis of studies reporting non-interventional factors.

Results

We included 31 studies out of the 825 unique articles identified in the systematic review of which 21 were included in the meta-analysis and 11 in the narrative synthesis. In meta-analysis, interventions were associated with a 47% improvement in the rate of compliance [(Random Effects (RE) Relative Risk (RR) = 1.47, 95% Confidence Interval (CI), 1.25–1.74, p-value < 0.01)]; an average 24 min reduction in the time to fluids [RE mean difference = − 24.11(95% CI − 14.09 to − 34.14 min, p value < 0.01)], and patients receiving an additional 575 mL fluids [RE mean difference = 575.40 (95% CI 202.28–1353.08, p value < 0.01)]. The compliance rate of early fluid administration reported in the studies included in the narrative synthesis is 48% [RR = 0.48 (95% CI 0.24–0.72)].

Conclusion

Performance improvement interventions improve compliance and time and volume of fluids administered to patients with sepsis in the emergency department. While patient-related factors such as advanced age, co-morbidities, cryptic shock were associated with poor compliance, important organisational factors such as inexperience of clinicians, overcrowding and inter-hospital transfers were also identified. A comprehensive understanding of the facilitators and barriers to early fluid administration is essential to design quality improvement projects.

PROSPERO Registration ID

CRD42021225417.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12873-021-00558-5.

Exploring nursing and medical perceptions of sepsis management in a New Zealand emergency department: A qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

Early sepsis recognition and treatment are essential in order to reduce the burden of disease. Initial assessment of patients with infection is often undertaken by ED nurses and resident doctors. This descriptive qualitative study aimed to explore their perceptions and perspectives regarding the factors that impede the identification and management of patients with sepsis.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study conducted between 30 January 2020 and 27 February 2020. Semi-structured focus group interviews were performed to collect data. All participants provided written informed consent and completed a basic demographic and work experience form. Two study investigators facilitated the interviews. Interviews were audio-recorded and later transcribed. Thematic analysis was performed with the aid of NVivo 12 software.

RESULTS

Six focus group interviews were conducted involving 40 ED nurses and doctors. Interview length ranged from 27 to 38 min (mean 33.5 min). Three major themes were identified: (i) clinical management; (ii) challenges and delays; and (iii) communication. Each of these themes was broken down into subthemes, which are presented in more detail.

CONCLUSION

ED nurses and doctors have identified important factors that limit and enhance their capacity to recognise and respond to patients with sepsis. Complex interactions exist between clinical and organisational structures that can affect the care of patients and the ability of clinicians to provide optimal care. The three major themes and specific subthemes provide a useful framework and stimulus for service improvements and research that could help foster future sepsis management improvement strategies.

Performance of the Simple Clinical Score (SCS) and the Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) to predict severity level and mortality rate among patients with sepsis in the emergency department

Nurses play a key role as the first line of service for patients with medical conditions and injuries in the emergency department (ED), which includes assessing patients for sepsis. The researchers evaluated tools to examine the performance of the Simple Clinical Score (SCS) and the Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) to predict sepsis severity and mortality among sepsis patients in the ED. A retrospective survey was performed, selecting participants by using a purposive sampling method, and including the medical records of all patients diagnosed with sepsis admitted to the ED at Singburi Hospital, Thailand. Data were analysed using the ROC curve and the Area Under Curve (AUC) to calculate the accuracy of each patient's mortality prediction. A total of 225 patients diagnosed with sepsis was identified, with a mortality rate of 59.11% after admission to the medical service and intensive care unit. The AUC analysis showed that the accuracy of the model generated from the REMS (88.6%) was higher than that of the SCS (76.7%). The authors also recommend that key variables identified in this research should be used to develop screening and assessment tools for sepsis in the context of the ED.