Objective Explore the relevant evidence about stress‐related cognitive appraisal and coping strategies among registered nurses in the emergency department (EDRNs) coping with the COVID‐19 pandemic. Methods This scoping review followed the methodological framework of Arksey and O'Malley to map relevant evidence and synthesize the findings. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus electronic databases for related studies from inception through February 2, 2022. This review further conducted study selection based on the PRISMA flow diagram and applied Lazarus and Folkman's Psychological Stress and Coping Theory to systematically organize, summarize, and report the findings. Findings Sixteen studies were included for synthesis. Most of the studies showed that the majority of EDRNs were overwhelmed by the COVID‐19 pandemic. Depression, triaging distress, physical exhaustion, and intention to leave ED nursing were cited as major threats to their wellness. Additionally, comprehensive training, a modified triage system, a safe workplace, psychological support, promotion of resilience, and accepting responsibility may help EDRNs cope with pandemic‐related challenges effectively. Conclusion The long‐lasting pandemic has affected the physical and mental health of EDRNs because they have increased their effort to respond to the outbreak with dynamically adjusted strategies. Future research should address a modified triage system, prolonged psychological issues, emergency healthcare quality, and solutions facing EDRNs during the COVID‐19 or related future pandemics. Clinical Relevance EDRNs have experienced physical and psychological challenges during the pandemic. The ED administrators need to take action to ensure EDRNs' safety in the workplace, an up‐to‐date triage system, and mental health of frontline nurses to provide high‐quality emergency care for combating COVID‐19.
Background To meet the surging demands for intubation and invasive ventilation as more COVID-19 patients begin their recovery, clinicians are challenged to find an ultra-brief and minimally invasive screen for postextubation dysphagia predicting feeding-tube dependence persisting for 72 h after extubation. Methods This study examined the predictive validity of a two-item swallowing screen on feeding-tube dependence over 72 h in patients following endotracheal extubation. Intensive-care-unit (ICU) patients (≥ 20 years) successfully extubated after ≥ 48 h endotracheal intubation were screened by trained nurses using the swallowing screen (comprising oral stereognosis and cough-reflex tests) 24 h postextubation. Feeding-tube dependence persisting for 72 h postextubation was abstracted from the medical record by an independent rater. To verify the results and cross-check whether the screen predicted penetration and/or aspiration during fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES), participants agreeing to receive FEES were analyzed within 30 min of screening. Results The results showed that 95/123 participants (77.2%) failed the screen, which predicted ICU patients’ prolonged (> 72 h) feeding-tube dependence, yielding sensitivity of 0.83, specificity of 0.35, and accuracy of 0.68. Failed-screen participants had 2.96-fold higher odds of feeding-tube dependence (95% CI, 1.13–7.76). For the 38 participants receiving FEES, the swallowing screen had 0.89 sensitivity to detect feeding-tube dependence and 0.86 sensitivity to predict penetration/aspiration, although specificity had room for improvement (0.36 and 0.21, respectively). Conclusion This ultra-brief swallowing screen is sufficiently sensitive to identify high-risk patients for feeding-tube dependence persisting over 72 h after extubation. Once identified, a further assessment and care are indicated to ensure the prompt return of patients’ oral feeding. Trial registration NCT03284892, registered on September 15, 2017.
Background The resumption of oral feeding and free from pneumonia are important therapeutic goals for critically ill patients who have been successfully extubated after prolonged (≥ 48 h) endotracheal intubation. We aimed to examine whether a swallowing and oral-care (SOC) program provided to critically ill patients extubated from prolonged mechanical ventilation improves their oral-feeding resumption and reduces 30-day pneumonia incidence. Methods In this randomized, open-label, controlled trial, participants were consecutively enrolled and randomized to receive the SOC program or usual care. The interventions comprised three protocols: oral-motor exercise, sensory stimulation and lubrication, and safe-swallowing education. Beginning on the day following patient extubation, an SOC nurse provided the three-protocol care for seven consecutive days or until death or hospital discharge. With independent outcome assessors, oral-feeding resumption (yes, no) corresponded to level 6 or level 7 on the Functional Oral Intake Scale (censored seven days postextubation) along with radiographically documented pneumonia (yes, no; censored 30 days postextubation), abstracted from participants’ electronic medical records were coded. Results We analyzed 145 randomized participants (SOC group = 72, control group = 73). The SOC group received, on average, 6.2 days of intervention (14.8 min daily) with no reported adverse events. By day 7, 37/72 (51.4%) of the SOC participants had resumed oral feeding vs. 24/73 (32.9%) of the control participants. Pneumonia occurred in 11/72 (15.3%) of the SOC participants and in 26/73 (35.6%) of the control participants. Independent of age and intubation longer than 6 days, SOC participants were likelier than their control counterparts to resume oral feeding (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.35; 95% CI 1.38–4.01) and had lower odds of developing pneumonia (adjusted odds ratio, 0.28; 95% CI 0.12–0.65). Conclusions The SOC program effectively improved patients’ odds that oral feeding would resume and the 30-day pneumonia incidence would decline. The program might advance dysphagia care provided to critically ill patients extubated from prolonged mechanical ventilation. Trial registration: NCT03284892, registered on September 15, 2017.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.