DESCRIBING SLEEP AND SEDATION PRACTICES IN THE ICU: A MULTINATIONAL SURVEY

Introduction Sleep disturbances are common in critically ill patients treated in the intensive care unit (ICU) with the potential for serious consequences and long-term effects on health outcomes and patient morbidity.
Objectives Our aim was to describe sleep management and sedation practices of adult ICUs in ten countries and to evaluate roles and responsibilities of the ICU staff in relation to key sleep and sedation decisions.
Methods A multicenter, self-administered survey sent to nurse managers of adult ICUs across 10 countries. The questionnaire comprised four domains: sleep characteristics of the critically ill; sleep and sedation practices; non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions used to improve sleep; and the autonomy and influence of nurses on sleeping practices in the ICU.
Results Overall response rate was 66% (range 32% UK to 100% Cyprus), providing data from 522 ICUs. In all countries, the most frequent patient characteristic perceived to identify sleep was lying quietly with closed eyes (N=409, 78%) (range 92% Denmark to 36% Italy). The most commonly used sedation scale was the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Score (RASS) (N=220, 42%) (range 81% UK to 0% Denmark, Cyprus where most ICUs used the Ramsay score). In most ICUs, selection of sleep medication (N=265, 51%) and assessment of effect (N=309, 59%) was performed by physicians and nurses based on collaborative discussion. In a minority of ICUs (N=161, 31%), decisions and assessments were made by physicians alone. The most commonly used (in all countries) non-pharmacological intervention to promote sleep was reducing ICU staff noise (N=473, 91%) (range 100% Denmark, Norway to 78% Canada). Only 95 ICUs (18%) used earplugs on a frequent basis (range 0% Greece, Cyprus, Denmark to 57% Sweden). Propofol was the drug used most commonly for sedation (N=359, 69%) (range 96% Sweden to 29% Canada). Chloral hydrate was used by only 63 (12%) ICUs (range 0% Greece, Cyprus, Denmark, Italy to 56% Germany). Sedation scales were used on a routine basis by 77% of the 522 ICUs. Participants scored nursing autonomy for sleep and sedation management as moderate; median score of 5 (scale of 0 to 10), range 7 (Canada, Greece, Sweden) to 4 (Norway, Poland). Nursing influence on sleep and sedation decisions was perceived considerable; median score 8, range 9 (Denmark) to 5 (Poland).
Conclusions We found considerable across country variation in sleep promotion and sedation management practices though most have adopted a sedation scale as recommended in professional society guidelines. Most ICUs in all countries used a range of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions to promote sleep. Most units reported inter-professional decision-making with nurses perceived to have substantial influence on sleep/sedation decisions.

Addressing the theory practice gap in nurse education: evaluating teaching through audit against NMC standards and final management placement

Introduction
This paper outlines an innovative approach to auditing and evaluating the content of a management and leadership module for undergraduate nursing students after their final management clinical placement. Normally evaluations of teaching in a module take place at the end of a teaching module and therefore do not properly reflect the value of the teaching in relation to practical clinical experience.
Aim
This audit and evaluation sought to explore both the practical value of the teaching and learning, and also the degree to which it the teaching reflected against the NMC Standards of Education and Learning (2010 domain 3).
Methods
Having piloted the evaluative tool with an earlier cohort of nursing students, this evaluation explored both a quantitative assessment employing a Personal Response System (n =172), together with a qualitative dimension (n=116), thus delivering paper-based comments and reflections from students on the value and practicality of the module teaching theory to their final clinical management experience. The quantitative audit data were analysed for frequencies and cross tabulation and the qualitative audit data were thematically analysed.
Results
Results suggest a significant proportion of the students, appreciated the quality of the standard of teaching, but more importantly, ‘valued or highly valued’ the teaching and learning in relation to how it helped to significantly inform their management placement experience. A smaller proportion of the students underlined limitations and areas in which further improvement can be made in teaching and learning to the module.
Conclusion
Significantly positive evaluation by the students of the practical value of teaching and learning, to the theoretical management module. This has proved a useful auditing approach in assessing the theoretical teaching to student’s Level 3 clinical experience, and facilitated significant recommendations as far as developing the teaching and learning to better reflect the practice needs of nursing students

Evaluating the objective structured long examination record for nurse education

An objective structured long examination record (OSLER) is a modification of the long-case clinical examination and is mainly used in medical education. This study aims to obtain nursing students' views of the OSLER compared with the objective structured clinical examination (OSCE), which is used to assess discrete clinical skills. A sample of third-year undergraduate nursing students (n=21) volunteered to participate from a cohort of 230 students. Participants undertook the OSLER under examination conditions. Pre-and post-test questionnaires gathered the students' views on the assessments and these were analysed from a mainly qualitative perspective. Teachers' and simulated patient views were also used for data triangulation. The findings indicate that the OSLER ensures more holistic assessment of a student's clinical skills and particularly essential skills such as communication, and that the OSLER, together with the OSCE, should be used to supplement the assessment of clinical competence in nursing education.