Access Restriction

Author LeBlanc, Jaclyn M. ♦ Kane-Gill, Sandra L. ♦ Pohlman, Anne S. ♦ Herr, Daniel L.
Source World Health Organization (WHO)-Global Index Medicus
Content type Text
Publisher Elsevier
File Format HTM / HTML
Language English
Difficulty Level Medium
Subject Domain (in DDC) Computer science, information & general works ♦ Library & information sciences ♦ Social sciences ♦ Social problems & services; associations ♦ Social welfare problems & services ♦ Natural sciences & mathematics ♦ Life sciences; biology ♦ Natural history of organisms ♦ Technology ♦ Medicine & health ♦ Pharmacology and therapeutics ♦ Diseases ♦ Management & auxiliary services ♦ General management ♦ Manufacture for specific uses ♦ Precision instruments & other devices
Subject Domain (in MeSH) Eukaryota ♦ Organisms ♦ Therapeutics ♦ Investigative Techniques ♦ Analytical, Diagnostic and Therapeutic Techniques and Equipment ♦ Information Science ♦ Information Science ♦ Persons ♦ Persons ♦ Health Care Facilities, Manpower, and Services ♦ Health Services Administration ♦ Health Care
Subject Keyword Discipline Critical Care ♦ Clinical Protocols ♦ Intensive Care Units ♦ Organization & Administration ♦ Personnel, Hospital ♦ Guideline Adherence ♦ Humans ♦ Standards ♦ Internet ♦ Practice Guidelines As Topic ♦ Reproducibility Of Results ♦ Journal Article
Abstract PURPOSE: To date, there has been no large multicenter, multiprofessional evaluation of protocol and guideline use in the intensive care unit (ICU). The primary purpose of this study was to describe national availability, development, implementation, and assessment of protocols in ICUs. A secondary objective was to compare perceived utility by ease of use, patient safety, cost containment, and compliance of protocols between nurses, physicians, and pharmacists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The survey was developed and tested for validity by 15 clinicians who identified additional domains of interest. An additional 15 clinicians of the 3 different professions evaluated the survey for relevancy and appropriateness of responses. Three survey experts evaluated survey construction. The survey was uploaded to a Web survey tool and pilot tested for clarity and ease of completion. RESULTS: The overall response rate for the survey was 18.1% (n = 614). Popular methods of education for protocol implementation included staff meetings (85.3%) and unit-specific in-services (77.7%). Protocols were most often updated when new information was available (40.8%) or every 12 months (17.9%). The most common limitation to development and implementation was limited personnel resources (24.5%) and physicians not wanting to use them (21.3%), respectively. Clinicians indicated that protocols made their job easier and improved cost containment some or most of the time. Sepsis protocols were identified as most useful in promoting patient outcomes by all 3 professions. CONCLUSIONS: The types of protocols available appear to be those assisting with management of high-alert medications. Overcoming the perceived barriers of protocol use within ICUs requires personnel for development and physician support. A better protocol review process may be necessary to assure optimal content, desired outcomes, and consistency with Institute for Safe Medication Practices guidelines.
Description Author Affiliation: LeBlanc JM ( Department of Pharmacy, Saint John Regional Hospital, Saint John NB E2E 4L2.
ISSN 08839441
Educational Role Student ♦ Teacher
Age Range above 22 year
Educational Use Reading ♦ Research ♦ Self Learning
Interactivity Type Expositive
Education Level UG and PG
Learning Resource Type Article
Publisher Date 2012-12-01
Publisher Place United States
e-ISSN 15578615
Journal Journal of Critical Care
Volume Number 27
Issue Number 6

Source: WHO-Global Index Medicus