PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Elizabeth Henneman

Publications and source records attributed to Elizabeth Henneman.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Using a collaborative weaning plan to decrease duration of mechanical ventilation and length of stay in the intensive care unit for patients receiving long-term ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Patients requiring mechanical ventilation for prolonged periods typically are sicker and have more comorbid illnesses than do patients who can be weaned more rapidly. As a result, the weaning process is often complex, requiring shared decision making by a skilled, multidisciplinary team. Unfortunately, many of the structures used in critical care units to plan and evaluate care do not lend themselves to collaborative management of patients. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of a collaborative weaning plan on outcomes, including duration of mechanical ventilation, for patients treated with mechanical ventilation for 7 days or more. METHODS: A collaborative weaning plan (weaning board and flow sheet) was introduced into the medical intensive care unit at the University of California Los Angeles, Medical Center. A historical design was used to compare outcomes before and after the plan was used. The primary outcome variable was duration of mechanical ventilation. Other outcomes studied included length of stay in the unit, cost, prevalence of complications (ie, reventilation, readmission to the intensive care unit), and mortality rate. RESULTS: The collaborative weaning plan decreased duration of ventilation by 4.9 days (P=.02) and decreased median length of stay in the unit by 4.5 days (P=.004). The median cost per stay in the unit decreased from $50462 to $37330 (P=.004). The prevalence of complications did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative structures (eg, weaning boards, flow sheets) are useful in decreasing duration of mechanical ventilation for patients receiving long-term ventilation.

APACHE↗

An educational project to improve knowledge related to pulse oximetry.

BACKGROUND: Pulse oximetry is a frequently used, noninvasive monitoring tool for assessing arterial blood oxygenation. Physicians, registered nurses, and respiratory therapists are responsible for the accurate interpretation of pulse oximetry data as part of the evaluation and management of acutely and critically ill patients. OBJECTIVES: (1) To evaluate the extent of current knowledge about pulse oximetry and (2) to increase clinicians' knowledge of research-based practices related to the appropriate use of pulse oximetry and interpretation of its results. METHODS: A test/survey of 17 true-false questions based on the research-based practice protocol of the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses was developed to evaluate current knowledge of pulse oximetry. A convenience sample of medical, nursing, and respiratory therapy staff was invited to complete the test/survey before and several months after an educational program to improve staff members' knowledge of pulse oximetry. The program included educational forums, policy changes, competency checklists, and verification of inclusion of research-based principles in orientation programs. RESULTS: A total of 442 staff members completed the test/survey given before the educational program: 331 nurses, 82 physicians, and 29 respiratory therapists. The overall mean percentage of correct answers was 66%. Differences between disciplines were significant: respiratory therapists scored slightly higher (76%) than did nurses (64%) and physicians (66%) (P = .01). The scores on the test/survey given after the educational program increased significantly, from 66% to 82% (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: This educational project improved staff members' knowledge of pulse oximetry monitoring.

Clinical Competence↗