American journal of infection control · 2019
What do patients say about their experience with urinary catheters and peripherally inserted central catheters?
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Trautner Barbara W, Saint Sanjay, Fowler Karen E, Van John, Rosen Tracey, Colozzi John, Chopra Vineet, Lescinskas Erica, Krein Sarah L
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the patient experience with urinary catheters or peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs). We sought to better understand patient perspectives on having a urinary catheter or a PICC by reviewing open-ended comments made by patients about having either of these 2 devices.
METHODS: As part of a larger study, we asked patients about certain catheter-related complications at the time of catheter placement and on days 14, 30, and 70 (PICCs only). In this larger project, we performed a structured assessment that included an open-ended question about other comments (initial interview) or problems (follow-up interview) associated with the device. For the current study, we conducted a descriptive analysis of these open-ended comments, classifying them as positive, negative, or neutral.
RESULTS: Positive comments about urinary catheters accounted for 9 of 147 comments (6%), whereas positive comments about PICCs accounted for 10 of 100 comments (10%). Positive comments for both catheter types were mostly related to convenience. More than 80% of comments about both types of devices were negative and fell into the following areas: catheter malfunction; pain, irritation, or discomfort; interference with activities of daily living; provider error; and other.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings underscore the need to optimize the patient experience with placement, ongoing use, and removal of urinary catheters and PICCs.
METHODS: As part of a larger study, we asked patients about certain catheter-related complications at the time of catheter placement and on days 14, 30, and 70 (PICCs only). In this larger project, we performed a structured assessment that included an open-ended question about other comments (initial interview) or problems (follow-up interview) associated with the device. For the current study, we conducted a descriptive analysis of these open-ended comments, classifying them as positive, negative, or neutral.
RESULTS: Positive comments about urinary catheters accounted for 9 of 147 comments (6%), whereas positive comments about PICCs accounted for 10 of 100 comments (10%). Positive comments for both catheter types were mostly related to convenience. More than 80% of comments about both types of devices were negative and fell into the following areas: catheter malfunction; pain, irritation, or discomfort; interference with activities of daily living; provider error; and other.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings underscore the need to optimize the patient experience with placement, ongoing use, and removal of urinary catheters and PICCs.