Advanced Search
Reader Login
|
Users Online: 1101
About Us
Editorial Board
Articles
Ahead of Print
Current Issue
Archives
Authors
Submit Article
Instructions
Search
Search
Advanced Search
Image Search
Medline Search
Subscribe
Contact Us
Export selected to
Endnote
Reference Manager
Procite
Medlars Format
RefWorks Format
BibTex Format
Access statistics : Table of Contents
2022| July-September | Volume 6 | Issue 3
Online since
November 28, 2022
Archives
Previous Issue
Next Issue
Most popular articles
Most cited articles
Show all abstracts
Show selected abstracts
Export selected to
Viewed
PDF
Cited
ORIGINAL ARTICLES
Factors influencing nurses' decision to activate critical care response team: The nursing perspective
Mustafa Ibrahim AlDhoon, Diana Selvamony Lalithabai, Nizar AbuSahyoun
July-September 2022, 6(3):68-74
DOI
:10.4103/sccj.sccj_16_22
Background:
Critical care response team (CCRT) intervenes quickly in life-threatening situations to reduce adverse outcomes and improve patient safety. Nurses play an essential role in CCRT activation. Despite clearly satisfied criteria, there have been instances where nurses have failed to activate CCRT.
Objective:
This study examined the factors that influence nurses' CCRT activation.
Methodology:
The proposed study was done in an acute health-care setting using a cross-sectional survey approach. The study participants included 206 nurses working in inpatient care units. Nursing staff in intensive care units, pediatric intensive care units, operating rooms, outpatient departments, and main emergency rooms were excluded from the study.
Results:
Moreover, half of the majority (54.4%) of the 206 responders are knowledgeable about CCRT activation. Nearly 83 (40.3%) choose not to activate CCRT due to fear of being chastised. Nurses were more reliant on physicians to trigger CCRT. The activation score significantly correlated with the nurse participants' job title and working unit.
Conclusions:
Nursing staff avoided using the CCRT for fear of being blamed despite having a positive impression. They are primarily reliant on physicians to initiate CCRT. In addition to education and training that engages all health-care workers, hospitals should empower nurses to reduce barriers and improve CCRT activation.
[ABSTRACT]
[FULL TEXT]
[PDF]
[Mobile Full text]
[EPub]
1,580
0
-
Awareness, opinion, attitude of intensive care unit specialists about the ethical guidelines for dealing with clinical decisions regarding the allocation of scarce resources during the COVID-19 pandemic
Faisal A Al-Suwaidan, Jamal S AlJarallah, Nada A Alyousefi, Ghaiath Hussein
July-September 2022, 6(3):61-67
DOI
:10.4103/sccj.sccj_17_22
Background:
With the escalation of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, critical care specialists have been challenged by ethical issues related to the distribution of scarce resources. Many relevant guidelines have been published worldwide. The Saudi Critical Care Society included a local framework for ethics in its first clinical guidelines for clinical decisions regarding the allocation of scarce resources during the COVID-19 pandemic for COVID-19 patients in intensive care units (ICUs). This study aimed to assess the awareness, opinions, and attitudes of ICU specialists concerning these ethical guidelines and the proposed definitions.
Methods:
A descriptive cross-sectional study using a self-administered questionnaire was conducted. The study population included 300 ICU physicians in Saudi Arabia who were members of the Saudi Critical Care Society.
Results:
A total of 70 participants (23.3%) responded to the questionnaire. Most were male, non-Saudi, and Muslim. Professionally, they were mostly intensivists with 10 or more years of experience. The most agreed-upon suggested definitions were “health crisis,” “salvageable patients” category, and the “necessity scale” (32; 45.7%, 37; 52.9%, 52; 74.3%, and 34; 48.6%, respectively). Less agreement was observed for the definitions of “de-escalation without omission” and “primary triage scale” (20; 28.6%, and 21; 3%, respectively). The most agreed-upon statements were those requiring healthcare providers to receive training on contagious diseases and calling for providing them with housing if a situation requires them to leave their homes (56; 80%), while the least agreed-upon statements concerned withholding mechanical ventilation from patients (29; 41.4%).
Conclusion:
During epidemics, health-care workers provide services in unusual, challenging situations. Doing so necessitates support in social, psychological, and professional areas. A decision-making framework is needed that endorses the cultural and religious contexts, as well as the lived experiences of frontline clinicians, including a clear de-escalation plan and a primary triage system during the pandemic.
[ABSTRACT]
[FULL TEXT]
[PDF]
[Mobile Full text]
[EPub]
1,539
0
-
CASE REPORT
ECPella: High-risk percutaneous coronary intervention in cardiogenic shock “case report”
Rayan Qutob, Alanoud Hassan A. Alkhannani, Arif Hussain, Owayed Al Shammeri, Alyaa Elhazmi
July-September 2022, 6(3):75-77
DOI
:10.4103/sccj.sccj_18_22
The utilization of mechanical circulatory support devices in high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) has recently evolved. In Saudi Arabia, the use of such devices is under-reported. Here, we present a 36-year-old patient who was admitted to the hospital with a non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction with biventricular dysfunction. A high-risk PCI consist of unprotected left main stenting was performed with the assistance of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation that allowed smooth and successful intervention. Two days later, Impella was used to augment the recovery of the myocardium. The implementation of this approach helped our patient hemodynamically and allowed the recovery of the myocardium.
[ABSTRACT]
[FULL TEXT]
[PDF]
[Mobile Full text]
[EPub]
1,046
0
-
© Saudi Critical Care Journal | Published by Wolters Kluwer -
Medknow
Sitemap
|
What's New
|
Feedback
|
Disclaimer
|
Privacy Notice
Online since 15
th
Dec, 2016