Issues concerning the on-going care of patients with comorbidities in acute care and post-discharge in Australia: a literature review

Issues concerning the on-going care of patients with comorbidities in acute care and post-discharge in Australia: a literature review

Background. Advances in medical science and improved lifestyles have reduced mortality rates in Australia and most western countries. This has resulted in an ageing population with a concomitant growth in the number of people who are living with chronic illnesses. Indeed a significant number of younger people experience more than one chronic illness. Large numbers of these may require repeated admissions to hospital for acute or episodic care that is superimposed upon the needs of their chronic conditions.

Aim. To explore the issues that circumscribe the complexities of caring for people with concurrent chronic illnesses, or comorbidities, in the acute care setting and postdischarge.

Methods. A literature review to examine the issues that impact upon the provision of comprehensive care to patients with comorbidities in the acute care setting and postdischarge.

Findings. Few studies have investigated this subject. From an Australian perspective, it is evident that the structure of the current health care environment has made it difficult to meet the needs of patients with comorbidities in the acute care setting and postdischarge. This is of major concern for nurses attempting to provide comprehensive care to an increasingly prevalent group of chronically ill people.

Conclusion. Further research is necessary to explore how episodic care is integrated into the on-going management of patients with comorbidities and how nurse clinicians can better use an episode of acute illness as an opportunity to review their overall management.

Use of medical orders in acute care oxygen therapy

The life of every living organism is sustained by the presence of oxygen and the acute deprivation of oxygen will, therefore, result in hypoxia and ultimately death. Although oxygen is normally present in the air, higher concentrations are required to treat many disease processes. Oxygen is therefore considered to be a drug requiring a medical prescription and is subject to any law that covers its use and prescription. Administration is typically authorized by a physician following legal written instructions to a qualified nurse. This standard procedure helps prevent incidence of misuse or oxygen deprivation which could worsen the patients hypoxia and ultimate outcome. Delaying the administration of oxygen until a written medical prescription is obtained could also have the same effect. Clearly, defined protocols should exist to allow for the legal administration of oxygen by nurses without a physicians order because any delay in administering oxygen to patients can very well lead to their death.

Nursing handover : it's time for a change

Nursing handover is a common part of nursing practice that is fundamental to safe patient care. Despite this, the literature provides little direction on the best way to conduct handover. This project aimed to examine nurses' perceptions of handover and to determine the strengths and limitations of the handover process. A staff survey was distributed to nurses in all inpatient wards at a metropolitan tertiary hospital. A total of 176 nurses responded to the staff survey. The findings revealed conflicting opinions about the effectiveness of the handover process; although a number of nurses were positive about current handover practice, indicating they were provided with sufficient information about patients and given opportunity to clarify patient care information, other nurses identified aspects of handover that could be improved. These included: the subjectivity of handover information, the time taken to conduct handover, repetition of information that could be found in the patients' care plans, and handing over of information by a nurse who has not cared for the patient. Some attention needs to given to addressing the perceived weaknesses associated with the handover process.

Assessment of variation in the alberta context tool : the contribution of unit level contextual factors and practice specialty in Canadian pediatric acute care settings

Background: There are few validated measures of organizational context and none that we located are parsimonious and address modifiable characteristics of context. The Alberta Context Tool (ACT) was developed to meet this need. The instrument assesses 8 dimensions of context, which comprise 10 concepts. The purpose of this paper is to report evidence to further the validity argument for ACT. The specific objectives of this paper are to: (1) examine the extent to which the 10 ACT concepts discriminate between patient care units and (2) identify variables that significantly contribute to between-unit variation for each of the 10 concepts.

Methods: 859 professional nurses (844 valid responses) working in medical, surgical and critical care units of 8 Canadian pediatric hospitals completed the ACT. A random intercept, fixed effects hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) strategy was used to quantify and explain variance in the 10 ACT concepts to establish the ACT’s ability to discriminate between units. We ran 40 models (a series of 4 models for each of the 10 concepts) in which we systematically assessed the unique contribution (i.e., error variance reduction) of different variables to between-unit variation. First, we constructed a null model in which we quantified the variance overall, in each of the concepts. Then we controlled for the contribution of individual level variables (Model 1). In Model 2, we assessed the contribution of practice specialty (medical, surgical, critical care) to variation since it was central to construction of the sampling frame for the study. Finally, we assessed the contribution of additional unit level variables (Model 3).

Results: The null model (unadjusted baseline HLM model) established that there was significant variation between units in each of the 10 ACT concepts (i.e., discrimination between units). When we controlled for individual characteristics, significant variation in the 10 concepts remained. Assessment of the contribution of specialty to between-unit variation enabled us to explain more variance (1.19% to 16.73%) in 6 of the 10 ACT concepts. Finally, when we assessed the unique contribution of the unit level variables available to us, we were able to explain additional variance (15.91% to 73.25%) in 7 of the 10 ACT concepts.

Conclusion: The findings reported here represent the third published argument for validity of the ACT and adds to the evidence supporting its use to discriminate patient care units by all 10 contextual factors. We found evidence of relationships between a variety of individual and unit-level variables that explained much of this between-unit variation for each of the 10 ACT concepts. Future research will include examination of the relationships between the ACT’s contextual factors and research utilization by nurses and ultimately the relationships between context, research utilization, and outcomes for patients.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients requiring unplanned transfer from subacute to acute care

The study aims to identify the reasons for, and outcomes from, unplanned transfers from subacute care to acute care. A retrospective patient record review of patients requiring unplanned transfer from subacute to an acute care emergency department (ED) from 1 July 2008 to 30 June 2009 was undertaken. Data collected included patient demographics, clinical characteristics in preceding transfer, and on ED arrival and outcome data. There were 136 patients included in the study with a median age of 81 years. The most common reasons for transfer were respiratory problems and altered conscious state. In the 24 h preceding transfer, 92.6% of patients had ≥ 1 physiological abnormality and 10.3% of patients had no physiological parameters documented. On ED arrival, 75% of patients had physiological abnormalities. Hospital admission occurred in 75% of patients and the inpatient mortality rate was 14.7%. Factors associated with inpatient mortality were tachypnoea and severe hypoxaemia in 24 h preceding transfer and tachypnoea, hypoxaemia, hypoxaemia, severe hypoxaemia and hypothermia on ED arrival. Patients requiring unplanned transfer had higher inpatient mortality than older hospital users. Reasons for unplanned transfer reflect known predictors of in-hospital adverse events so predictive use of physiological data and patient characteristics might optimize patient safety.