Key result
Implementation of evidence-based strategies for nonpharmacological DVT prophylaxis decreased the rate of patient discharge due to clinical deterioration from 31.4% to 5.7%.
Why the study?
Critically ill patients are at high risk for deep venous thrombosis, but clinical application of effective nonpharmacologic prophylaxis has not been optimal.
Does a best practice implementation project improve compliance with nonpharmacological DVT prophylaxis in respiratory ICU patients?
Does a best practice implementation project improve compliance with nonpharmacological DVT prophylaxis in respiratory ICU patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 5.7% vs 31.4%
An evidence-based implementation project significantly improved compliance with nonpharmacological DVT prophylaxis and nurses' knowledge in a respiratory ICU.
May reduce deterioration discharges in respiratory ICUs; leaves open generalizability pending larger prospective studies.
Objectives: To increase the compliance with deep venous thrombosis (DVT) nonpharmacologic prophylaxis best practice recommendations while ensuring appropriate and structured nonpharmacologic prophylaxis for patients in the respiratory ICU. Background: DVT is a major problem for patients, with those who are critically ill representing a high-risk population for developing the condition. Nonpharmacologic prophylaxis is considered an effective intervention. However, the application of such interventions in practice has not been optimal to date. Methods: The current project was conducted in a respiratory ICU of a tertiary hospital. Audit criteria were developed on the basis of an evidence summary developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute, whereby the institute's Practical Application of Clinical Evidence System program to facilitate an audit and feedback cycle was utilized as an implementation framework. Baseline and follow-up audits on nonpharmacological DVT prophylaxis were conducted for 35 patients against five evidence-based recommendations. In addition, the nurses’ knowledge and attitude regarding DVT prophylaxis were investigated both prior to and postimplementation. Results: In the baseline audit, compliance with the five evidence-based audit criteria was less than 15%. After the implementation of strategies including education, person-centered care, financial and human-resource support, there was a significant improvement in all the audit criteria. In addition, improvements in the nurses’ knowledge and attitude regarding DVT prophylaxis were reported. The rate of discharged patients due to a deterioration of their condition decreased from 31.4 to 5.7% in the follow-up cycle. One DVT patient occurred in the baseline data, whereas no new incidences of DVT were found in the follow-up data. Conclusion: The project not only improved nurses’ knowledge and attitude regarding DVT prevention, but also remarkably improved the implementation of nonpharmacological DVT prophylaxis. The application of evidence-based nonpharmacological DVT prophylaxis may improve patients’ outcomes in the ICU.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wu et al. (2020) studied Deep venous thrombosis risk in critical care (n=35). Implementation strategies including education, person-centered care, and resource support vs. Baseline (pre-implementation) was evaluated on Rate of discharged patients due to a deterioration of their condition. Implementation of evidence-based strategies for nonpharmacological DVT prophylaxis decreased the rate of patient discharge due to clinical deterioration from 31.4% to 5.7%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: