Reduction of inappropriate medications among older nursing-home residents: a nurse-led, pre/post-design, intervention study

Background: Medication-related problems are common in the growing population of older adults and inappropriate prescribing is a preventable risk factor. Explicit criteria such as the Beers criteria provide a valid instrument for describing the rate of inappropriate medication (IM) prescriptions among older adults. Objective: To reduce IM prescriptions based on explicit Beers criteria using a nurse-led intervention in a nursing-home (NH) setting. Study Design: The pre/post-design included IM assessment at study start (pre-intervention), a 4-month intervention period, IM assessment after the intervention period (post-intervention) and a further IM assessment at 1-year follow-up. Setting: 204-bed inpatient NH in Bern, Switzerland. Participants: NH residents aged ≥60 years. Intervention: The intervention included four key intervention elements: (i) adaptation of Beers criteria to the Swiss setting; (ii) IM identification; (iii) IM discontinuation; and (iv) staff training. Main Outcome Measure: IM prescription at study start, after the 4-month intervention period and at 1-year follow-up. Results: The mean±SD resident age was 80.3±8.8 years. Residents were prescribed a mean±SD 7.8±4.0 medications. The prescription rate of IMs decreased from 14.5% pre-intervention to 2.8% post-intervention (relative risk [RR] = 0.2; 95% CI 0.06, 0.5). The risk of IM prescription increased nonstatistically significantly in the 1-year follow-up period compared with post-intervention (RR = 1.6; 95% CI 0.5, 6.1). Conclusions: This intervention to reduce IM prescriptions based on explicit Beers criteria was feasible, easy to implement in an NH setting, and resulted in a substantial decrease in IMs. These results underscore the importance of involving nursing staff in the medication prescription process in a long-term care setting.

Perinatal care at the limit of viability between 22 and 26 completed weeks of gestation in Switzerland. 2011 revision of the Swiss recommendations

Perinatal care of pregnant women at high risk for preterm delivery and of preterm infants born at the limit of viability (22-26 completed weeks of gestation) requires a multidisciplinary approach by an experienced perinatal team. Limited precision in the determination of both gestational age and foetal weight, as well as biological variability may significantly affect the course of action chosen in individual cases. The decisions that must be taken with the pregnant women and on behalf of the preterm infant in this context are complex and have far-reaching consequences. When counselling pregnant women and their partners, neonatologists and obstetricians should provide them with comprehensive information in a sensitive and supportive way to build a basis of trust. The decisions are developed in a continuing dialogue between all parties involved (physicians, midwives, nursing staff and parents) with the principal aim to find solutions that are in the infant's and pregnant woman's best interest. Knowledge of current gestational age-specific mortality and morbidity rates and how they are modified by prenatally known prognostic factors (estimated foetal weight, sex, exposure or nonexposure to antenatal corticosteroids, single or multiple births) as well as the application of accepted ethical principles form the basis for responsible decision-making. Communication between all parties involved plays a central role. The members of the interdisciplinary working group suggest that the care of preterm infants with a gestational age between 22 0/7 and 23 6/7 weeks should generally be limited to palliative care. Obstetric interventions for foetal indications such as Caesarean section delivery are usually not indicated. In selected cases, for example, after 23 weeks of pregnancy have been completed and several of the above mentioned prenatally known prognostic factors are favourable or well informed parents insist on the initiation of life-sustaining therapies, active obstetric interventions for foetal indications and provisional intensive care of the neonate may be reasonable. In preterm infants with a gestational age between 24 0/7 and 24 6/7 weeks, it can be difficult to determine whether the burden of obstetric interventions and neonatal intensive care is justified given the limited chances of success of such a therapy. In such cases, the individual constellation of prenatally known factors which impact on prognosis can be helpful in the decision making process with the parents. In preterm infants with a gestational age between 25 0/7 and 25 6/7 weeks, foetal surveillance, obstetric interventions for foetal indications and neonatal intensive care measures are generally indicated. However, if several prenatally known prognostic factors are unfavourable and the parents agree, primary non-intervention and neonatal palliative care can be considered. All pregnant women with threatening preterm delivery or premature rupture of membranes at the limit of viability must be transferred to a perinatal centre with a level III neonatal intensive care unit no later than 23 0/7 weeks of gestation, unless emergency delivery is indicated. An experienced neonatology team should be involved in all deliveries that take place after 23 0/7 weeks of gestation to help to decide together with the parents if the initiation of intensive care measures appears to be appropriate or if preference should be given to palliative care (i.e., primary non-intervention). In doubtful situations, it can be reasonable to initiate intensive care and to admit the preterm infant to a neonatal intensive care unit (i.e., provisional intensive care). The infant's clinical evolution and additional discussions with the parents will help to clarify whether the life-sustaining therapies should be continued or withdrawn. Life support is continued as long as there is reasonable hope for survival and the infant's burden of intensive care is acceptable. If, on the other hand, the health car...

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: prevention and management of complications

Assessment of elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis and decisions in terms of management strategy (conservative with or without balloon aortic valvuloplasty, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement) are complex and warrant a multidisciplinary approach involving collaboration between experienced cardiac surgeons, interventional cardiologists, cardiac imaging specialists, anaesthesiologists, geriatricians and a specialised nursing staff. Patient history, comorbid conditions, perioperative risk stratification as well as anatomical and procedural considerations require careful review on an individual, case-by-case basis and have a major impact on treatment allocation. The aims of this article are to provide insights into the fundamental role of appropriate patient screening and selection, and to review the nature, management and prevention of the most important procedural complications associated with the TAVI procedure.

[Radiation exposure in (90)Y-Zevalin therapy: results of a prospective multicentre trial]

AIM of this study was the assessment of the radiation exposure from preparation and application of (90)Y-Zevalin, the measurement of the dose rate at the patient, the exposure of family members as well as the determination of the activity concentration in urine of patients. METHODS: Overall data from 31 therapeutic administrations carried out in four institutions were evaluated. During preparation and application of (90)Y-Zevalin the finger exposures of radiochemists, technicians, and physicians were measured. The dose rate of the patient was measured immediately after radioimmunotherapy. In patients treated in a nuclear medicine therapy unit, urine was collected over a two day period and the corresponding activity was determined. Family members of outpatients were asked to wear a dosimeter over a seven day period. RESULTS: During the preparation we found a maximum skin dose of 6 mSv at the average, and during application of 3 mSv, respectively. After administration of (90)Y the dose rate was 0.4 +/- 0.1 microSv/h at 2 m distance. Urine measurements yielded a cumulated 24 h excretion of 3.9 +/- 1.4% and 4.4 +/- 1.4% within 48 h, respectively, that is equivalent to 43 +/- 18 and 50 +/- 20 MBq of (90)Y, respectively. Family members received a radiation exposure of 40 +/- 14 microSv over seven days. CONCLUSION: During preparation and application of (90)Y-Zevalin appropriate radiation shielding is necessary. For family members as well as nursing staff no additional special radiation protection measures beyond those being common for other nuclear medicine procedures are necessary.

SwissScoring--a nationwide survey of NEMS assessing practices and its accuracy.

BACKGROUND The nine equivalents of nursing manpower use score (NEMS) is used to evaluate critical care nursing workload and occasionally to define hospital reimbursements. Little is known about the caregivers' accuracy in scoring, about factors affecting this accuracy and how validity of scoring is assured. METHODS Accuracy in NEMS scoring of Swiss critical care nurses was assessed using case vignettes. An online survey was performed to assess training and quality control of NEMS scoring and to collect structural and organizational data of participating intensive care units (ICUs). Aggregated structural and procedural data of the Swiss ICU Minimal Data Set were used for matching. RESULTS Nursing staff from 64 (82%) of the 78 certified adult ICUs participated in this survey. Training and quality control of scoring shows large variability between ICUs. A total of 1378 nurses scored one out of 20 case vignettes: accuracy ranged from 63.7% (intravenous medications) to 99.1% (basic monitoring). Erroneous scoring (8.7% of all items) was more frequent than omitted scoring (3.2%). Mean NEMS per case was 28.0 ± 11.8 points (reference score: 25.7 ± 14.2 points). Mean bias was 2.8 points (95% confidence interval: 1.0-4.7); scores below 37.1 points were generally overestimated. Data from units with a greater nursing management staff showed a higher bias. CONCLUSION Overall, nurses assess the NEMS score within a clinically acceptable range. Lower scores are generally overestimated. Inaccurate assessment was associated with a greater size of the nursing management staff. Swiss head nurses consider themselves motivated to assure appropriate scoring and its validation.

Diabetes-related knowledge among medical and nursing house staff

To assess the diabetes-related knowledge of medical and nursing house staff with particular focus on inpatient diabetes management and insulin therapy.

Caring for ageing migrants in nursing homes: 'doing diversity' while 'doing death'

The proposed paper will present first results of a research project investigating how nursing homes in Switzerland deal with migrant elders who are in intensive need of care. Focusing on the end-of-life in institutional care settings, the intention is to explore the dimensions of ‘doing death’ in Swiss nursing homes when the elderly involved are of migrant background. The focus is laid on the co-construction of end of life in interactions between residents of migrant background and professional carers involved (often of migrant background themselves), and will thereby focus on processes of ‘doing diversity’ while ‘doing death’. To do so, we chose an ethnographic approach focusing on the participant observation of everyday practices of ‘doing death’ and ‘death work’ and on interviewing staff, residents and their relatives. Caring for ageing migrants at the end of their lives is studied in different types of assisted living at the end of life: The field of research was entered by studying a group specific department for residents of so-called ‘Mediterranean’ background. It was contrasted by a department stressing the individuality of each resident but including a considerable number of residents with migrant background. We are interested in how (and if at all) specific forms of ‘doing community’ within different types of departments may also lead to specific ways of ‘doing death’, which aim at a stronger embeddedness of dying trajectories in social relations of reciprocity and exchange. Furthermore, migrant ‘doing death’ is expected to be particularly negotiable since the potential diversities of symbolic reference systems and daily practices are widened. If the respective resident is limited in his/her capacities to play an active part in negotiating about ‘good care’ and ‘good dying’ – either due to language competences, which would be migrant specific, or due to degenerative diseases, which is not migrant specific – the field of negotiations will be left up to the professionals within the organization (and to the relatives, which are, however, not constantly present). Strategies of stereotyping the ‘other’ as well as driving nurses, caring aides and other professionals of migrant background into roles of ‘cultural experts’ or ‘transcultural translators’ are expected to be common in such situations. However, the task of negotiating what would be a ‘good dying’ and what measures are appropriate is always at stake in contemporary heterogeneous societies. Therefore we would argue that studying dying processes involving migrant residents is looking at paradigmatic manifestations of doing death in recent contexts of reflexive modernity.