The results of the surveys, which were generally consistent, identified several remediable misconceptions regarding insulin therapy and suggest targets for educational interventions.

This study examined the knowledge, attitudes, and clinical practice of registered nurses (N = 120) regarding pain management. Data were collected from nine varied clinical units in a large, university-affiliated, teaching hospital in an urban area of the Northeast. Demographic information was also collected to explore the relationship between nurses' characteristics, including previous pain education, clinical experience, area of clinical practice, and other variables, and knowledge, attitudes, and clinical practice. Three instruments were used in the study: (a) the Pain Management: Nurses' Knowledge and Attitude Survey; (b) a 12-item demographic questionnaire; and (c) a Pain Audit Tool (PAT) to gather data regarding pain assessment, documentation, and treatment practices from charts. Mean scores from the nursing knowledge and attitudes survey on pain revealed knowledge deficits and inconsistent responses in many areas related to pain management (mean, 62%; range, 41%-90%). The top two nurse-ranked barriers to pain management were related to patient reluctance to report pain and to take opioids for pain relief. Demographic data revealed that education about pain was most inadequate in the following areas: nonpharmacological interventions to relieve pain, the difference between acute and chronic pain, and the anatomy and physiology of pain. Chart audits with the Pain Audit Tool revealed that 76% of the charts (N = 82) lacked documentation of the use of a patient self-rating tool by nurses to assess pain, despite a high reported use (76%) of such a self-rating tool. Adjunct medications were ordered with some consistency, but appeared to be underutilized. This was especially true of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (mean use, 1%). Ninety percent of the charts had no documentation of the use of nonpharmacological interventions to relieve pain. Although this clinical setting has policies and resources in place regarding the management of pain, it would appear that they are not optimal. Practical recommendations are presented for increasing nurses' knowledge about pain management; improving the quality and the consistency of the assessment, documentation and treatment of pain; and disseminating pain management information.

No abstract

OBJECTIVE:To describe trends and risk factors for pressure injuries (PIs) in adult critical care patients proned to alleviate acute respiratory distress syndrome secondary to COVID-19 and examine the effectiveness of products and strategies used to mitigate PIs. METHODS:The authors conducted a retrospective chart review between April 9 and June 8, 2020. Demographic data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Differences between groups with and without PIs were analyzed.RESULTS: Among 147 patients, significant PI risk factors included male sex ( P = .019), high body mass index (>40 kg/m 2 ; P = .020), low Braden Scale score (<12; P = .018), and low-dose vasopressor therapy ( P = .020). Taping endotracheal tubes (ETTs) caused significantly fewer facial PIs than commercial ETT holders ( P < .0001). Maximum prone duration/session was a significant risk factor for anterior PIs ( P = . 016), which dropped 71% with newer pressure redistribution products. D-Dimer greater than 3,200 μg/mL ( P = .042) was a significant risk factor for sacrococcygeal PIs while supine. Mortality was 30%; significant risk factors included age older than 60 years (P = .005), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score greater than 11 ( P = .003), and comorbid congestive heart failure ( P = .016). CONCLUSIONS:Taping the ETT, limiting the maximum duration of prone positioning to less than 32 hours, and frequent repositioning while supine may reduce the number of modifiable risk factors for PIs. Standardized methods for testing products for PI prevention will inform individualized patient care.