(Mis)Using Pulse Oximetry : A Review of Pulse Oximetry use in Acute Care Medical Wards

Background: Nurses routinely use pulse oximetry (SpO2) monitoring equipment in acute care. Interpretation of the reading involves physical assessment and awareness of parameters including temperature, haemoglobin, and peripheral perfusion. However, there is little information on whether these clinical signs are routinely measured or used in pulse oximetry interpretation by nurses. Aim: The aim of this study was to review current practice of SpO2 measurement and the associated documentation of the physiological data that is required for accurate interpretation of the readings. The study reviewed the documentation practices relevant to SpO2 in five medical wards of a tertiary level metropolitan hospital. Method: A prospective casenote audit was conducted on random days over a three-month period. The audit tool had been validated in a previous study. Results: One hundred and seventy seven episodes of oxygen saturation monitoring were reviewed. Our study revealed a lack of parameters to validate the SpO2 readings. Only 10% of the casenotes reviewed had sufficient physiological data to meaningfully interpret the SpO2 reading and only 38% had an arterial blood gas as a comparator. Nursing notes rarely documented clinical interpretation of the results. Conclusion: The audits suggest that medical and nursing staff are not interpreting the pulse oximetry results in context and that the majority of the results were normal with no clinical indication for performing this observation. This reduces the usefulness of such readings and questions the appropriateness of performing “routine” SpO2 in this context.

The Development of Competency Standards for Specialist Critical Care Nurses

In defining the contemporary role of the specialist nurse it is necessary to challenge the concept of nursing as merely a combination of skills and knowledge. Nursing must be demonstrated and defined in the context of client care and include the broader notions of professional development and competence. This qualitative study sought to identify the competency standards for nurse specialists in critical care and to articulate the differences between entry-to-practice standards and the advanced practice of specialist nurses. Over 800 hours of specialist critical care nursing practice were observed and grouped into 'domains' or major themes of specialist practice using a constant comparison qualitative technique. These domains were further refined to describe attributes of the registered nurses which resulted in effective and/or superior performance (competency standards) and to provide examples of performance (performance criteria) which met the defined standard. Constant comparison of the emerging domains, competency standards and performance criteria to observations of specialist critical care practice, ensured the results provided a true reflection of the specialist nursing role. Data analysis resulted in 20 competency standards grouped into six domains: professional practice, reflective practice, enabling, clinical problem solving, teamwork, and leadership. Each of these domains is comprised of between two and seven competency standards. Each standard is further divided into component parts or 'elements' and the elements are illustrated with performance criteria. The competency standards are currently being used in several Australian critical care educational programmes and are the foundation for an emerging critical care credentialling process. They have been viewed with interest by a variety of non-critical care specialty groups and may form a common precursor from which further specialist nursing practice assessment will evolve.