No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background: The simplest method of initiating and maintaining therapeutic continuous positive airways pressure (CPAP) therapy for obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) has not been established. Methods: Ninety eight subjects with OSA requiring CPAP treatment (more than 10 dips in oxygen desaturation of .4% per hour of sleep study and Epworth Sleepiness Score (ESS) .9) were randomised prospectively to three different methods of CPAP delivery for 6 months: (1) autotitration pressure throughout; (2) autotitration pressure for 1 week followed by fixed pressure (95th centile) thereafter; and (3) fixed pressure determined by algorithm (based on neck size and dip rate). Patients and investigators were blind to group allocation. One week after initiation the patients were routinely reviewed by sleep nurses. Study assessments took place before starting CPAP treatment and 1 and 6 months after to assess ESS, maintenance of wakefulness test, 24 hour blood pressure, general health (SF-36), and sleep apnoea related quality of life. CPAP internal monitoring data were also collected. Results: There were no significant differences in any of the outcome measures or CPAP monitoring data between the three groups. The 95th centile CPAP pressures delivered in the 6 month and 1 week autotitration groups were higher than in the algorithm group, but the median pressures were lowest in the 6 month autotitration group. Conclusions: The method of determining CPAP pressure for treatment of moderate to severe OSA makes no significant difference to clinical outcome measures. The autotitration CPAP machine used has no advantage in this setting over simpler methods of pressure determination.

Aim To determine correlations for nurse self‐reported occupational stress, prevalence of cognitive failure (CF), and adverse events. Design Cross‐sectional nationwide survey. Methods Tertiary‐level public hospitals (N = 115) from 13 provinces in Iran were recruited and 2,895 nurses surveyed (August 2016–December 2017). Participants’ self‐reported demographic information, occupational stress, CF, and frequency of adverse events were analysed using chi‐square, t tests, and binary logistic regression. Results This study showed that 29.1% of nurses had experienced adverse events in the past six months. Significant predictors for reported adverse events from logistic regression were ‘Role stressors’, ‘Interpersonal relations stressors’, and ‘Action’, while ‘Working environment stressors’ was protective for reported adverse events. Demographic predictors of adverse events were longer work hours and male gender, while those working in critical care units, general wards, and other wards had higher reported adverse events than for emergency wards. Conclusions Occupational stress and CF are associated with the reporting of adverse events. Further research is needed to assess interventions to address occupational stress and CF to reduce adverse events. Impact Adverse events compromise patient safety, lead to increased healthcare costs, and impact nursing staff. Higher self‐reported adverse events were associated with higher reported stressors and CF. Understanding the factors that influence occupational stress, CF, and adverse events will support quality patient care and safety.