METHODS: Bone procurement workshop was held for 2 days for doctors and paramedics. The knowledge on bone procurement was evaluated in pre- and post-assessments by answering self administration questionnaire before and after the workshop, respectively.
RESULTS: A total of 50 participants comprised of doctors and paramedics attended the workshop however only 15 (55.6%) doctors and 12 (44.4%) paramedics completed the assessments. Overall, the mean total score for the post-assessment (61.4%) was significantly higher (p
METHODS: A single-blinded randomised hospital-based trial was undertaken involving 540 nurses assigned to two intervention groups and a waitlist group. Intervention group-1 received a face-to-face training course comprising 20 h spread over six weeks and a hard copy of the module, while intervention group-2 only received the hard copy of the module "without training". In contrast, the waitlist group did not receive anything during the period of collecting data. A self-administered NI control measures-evaluation questionnaire was utilised in collecting the data from the participants; before the intervention, at six weeks and 3 months after the end of the intervention. The period of data collection was between 1st May and 30th October 2016.
RESULTS: The results from collecting and analysing the data showed a statistically significant difference in the mean knowledge scores between the intervention groups that were detectable immediately post-intervention with a mean difference (MD) of 4.31 (P
DESIGN: Quasi-experimental study consisting of a single group before-and-after study design.
SETTING: A public emergency hospital in Mecca, Saudi Arabia.
PARTICIPANTS: 660 (preintervention) and then 498 (postintervention) handwritten physician orders, medication administration records (MRAs) and pharmacy dispensing sheets of 482 and 388 patients, respectively, from emergency wards, inpatient settings and the pharmacy department were reviewed.
INTERVENTION: The intervention consisted of a series of interactive lectures delivered by an experienced clinical pharmacist to all hospital staff members and dissemination of educational tools (flash cards, printed list of HRAs, awareness posters) designed in line with the recommendations of the Institute for Safe Medical Practices and the US Food and Drug Administration. The duration of intervention was from April to May 2011.
MAIN OUTCOME: Reduction in the incidence of HRAs use from the preintervention to postintervention study period.
FINDINGS: The five most common abbreviations recorded prior to the interventions were 'IJ for injection' (28.6%), 'SC for subcutaneous' (17.4%), drug name and dose running together (9.7%), 'OD for once daily' (5.8%) and 'D/C for discharge' (4.3%). The incidence of the use of HRAs was highest in discharge prescriptions and dispensing records (72.7%) followed by prescriptions from in-patient wards (47.3%). After the intervention, the overall incidence of HRA was significantly reduced by 52% (ie, 53.6% vs 25.5%; p=0.001). In addition, there was a statistically significant reduction in the incidence of HRAs across all three settings: the pharmacy department (72.7% vs 39.3%), inpatient settings (47.3% vs 23.3%) and emergency wards (40.9% vs 10.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacist-led educational interventions can significantly reduce the use of HRAs by healthcare providers. Future research should investigate the long-term effectiveness of such educational interventions through a randomised controlled trial.
BACKGROUND: Early identification of delirium in intensive care units is crucial for patient care. Hence, nurses require adequate knowledge to enable appropriate evaluation of delirium using standardised practice and assessment tools.
DESIGN: This study, performed in Malaysia, used a single-group pretest-posttest study design to assess the effect of educational interventions and hands-on practices on nurses' knowledge of intensive care unit delirium and delirium assessment.
METHODS: Sixty-one nurses participated in educational intervention sessions, including classroom learning, demonstrations and hands-on practices on the Confusion Assessment Method-Intensive Care Unit. Data were collected using self-administered questionnaires for the pre- and postintervention assessments. Analysis to determine the effect of the educational intervention consisted of the repeated-measures analysis of covariance.
RESULTS: There were significant differences in the knowledge scores pre- and postintervention, after controlling for demographic characteristics. The two most common perceived barriers to the adoption of the intensive care unit delirium assessment tool were "physicians did not use nurses' delirium assessment in decision-making" and "difficult to interpret delirium in intubated patients".
CONCLUSIONS: Educational intervention and hands-on practices increased nurses' knowledge of delirium assessment. Teaching and interprofessional involvements are essential for a successful implementation of intensive care unit delirium assessment practice.
RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This study supports existing evidences, indicating that education and training could increase nurses' knowledge of delirium and delirium assessment. Improving nurses' knowledge could potentially lead to better delirium management practice and improve ICU patient care. Thus, continuous efforts to improve and sustain nurses' knowledge become relevant in ICU settings.