Interprofessional collaboration in the intensive care unit: Power sharing is key (but are we up to it?)

Combining the Nurse Intuition Patient Deterioration Scale with the National Early Warning Score provides more Net Benefit in predicting serious adverse events: A prospective cohort study in medical, surgical, and geriatric wards

OBJECTIVES

This prospective cohort study aimed to assess the predictive value of the Nurse Intuition Patient Deterioration Scale (NIPDS) combined with the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) for identifying serious adverse events in patients admitted to diverse hospital wards.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY/DESIGN

Data was collected between December 2020 and February 2021 in a 350-bed acute hospital near Brussels, Belgium. The study followed a prospective cohort design, employing NIPDS alongside NEWS for risk assessment. Patients were monitored for 24 h post-registration, with outcomes recorded.

SETTING

The study was conducted in a hospital with a Rapid Response System (RRS) and electronic patient record wherein NEWS was routinely collected. Patients admitted to two medical, two surgical, and two geriatric wards were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome included death, urgent code calls, or unplanned ICU transfers within 24 h after NIPDS registration. The secondary outcome comprised rapid response team activations or changes in Do-Not-Resuscitate codes.

RESULTS

In a cohort of 313 patients, 10/313 and 31/313 patients reached the primary and secondary outcome respectively. For the primary outcome, NIPDS had a sensitivity of 0.900 and specificity of 0.927, while NEWS had a sensitivity of 0.300 and specificity of 0.974. Decision Curve Analysis demonstrated that NIPDS provided more Net Benefit across various Threshold Probabilities. Combining NIPDS and NEWS showed potential for optimizing rapid response systems. Especially in resource-constrained settings, NIPDS could be used as a calling criterion.

CONCLUSION

The NIPDS displayed strong predictive capabilities for adverse events. Integrating NIPDS into existing rapid response systems can objectify nurse intuition, enhancing patient safety.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

The Nurse Intuition Patient Deterioration Scale (NIPDS) is a valuable tool for detecting patient deterioration. Implementing NIPDS alongside traditional scores such as NEWS can improve patient care and safety. The optimal NIPDS threshold to activate rapid response is ≥5.

Factors that influence critical care nurses' management of sedation for ventilated patients in critical care: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Optimising sedation use is key to timely extubation. Whilst sedation protocols may be used to guide critical care nurses' management of sedation, sedation management and decision-making is complex, influenced by multiple factors related to patients' circumstances, intensive care unit design and the workforce.

AIM

To explore (i) critical care nurses' experiences managing sedation in mechanically ventilated patients and (ii) the factors that influence their sedation-related decision-making.

DESIGN

Qualitative descriptive study using semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed using Braun and Clarke's six-step thematic analysis.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This study was conducted in a 26-bed level 3 accredited ICU, in a private hospital in Melbourne, Australia. The majority of patients are admitted following elective surgery. Critical care nurses, who were permanently employed as a registered nurse, worked at least 16 h per week, and cared for ventilated patients, were invited to participate.

FINDINGS

Thirteen critical care nurses participated. Initially, participants suggested their experiences managing sedation were linked to local unit policy and learning. Further exploration revealed that experiences were synonymous with descriptors of factors influencing sedation decision-making according to three themes: (i) Learning from past experiences, (ii) Situational awareness and (iii) Prioritising safety. Nurses relied on their cumulative knowledge from prior experiences to guide decision-making. Situational awareness about other emergent priorities in the unit, staffing and skill-mix were important factors in guiding sedation decision-making. Safety of patients and staff was essential, at times overriding goals to reduce sedation.

CONCLUSION

Sedation decision making cannot be considered in isolation. Rather, sedation decision making must take into account outcomes of patient assessment, emergent priorities, unit and staffing factors and safety concerns.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

Opportunities for ongoing education are essential to promote nurses' situational awareness of other emergent unit priorities, staffing and skill-mix, in addition to evidence-based sedation management and decision making.