The Pediatric Emergency Department Nurse and Gastrostomy Tube Replacement

Author:

VanDerhoef Katie1,Proudford Chantel2,Amoni Ilounose3,Jimenez Czarina4,Strutt Jonathon3,Segura Bradley5,Zaremba Jennifer6,Louie Jeffrey P.3

Affiliation:

1. University of Minnesota, Department of Pediatrics, MHealth Fairview Masonic Children's Hospital, Minneapolis, MN

2. Emergency Department, MHealth Fairview Masonic Children's Hospital, Minneapolis, MN

3. University of Minnesota, Division of Emergency Medicine, MHealth Fairview Masonic Children's Hospital, Minneapolis, MN

4. University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN

5. University of Minnesota, Department of Pediatric Surgery, MHealth Fairview Masonic Children's Hospital, Minneapolis, MN

6. MHealth Fairview Masonic Children's Hospital, Minneapolis, MN.

Abstract

AimTo review the outcomes of a nurse-only guideline for replacement of gastrostomy tubes (g-tubes) in a pediatric emergency department (ED) and compare rates of success, failure, length of stay (LOS), and return visits with that of ED physicians.DesignNursing g-tube guidelines, created by a nurse educator and nursing council, were instigated on January 31, 2018. Variables examined included LOS, age at visit, return visit within 72 hours, reason for replacement, and any postplacement complications.Review MethodsData of g-tube placement by nurses and physicians were compared usingttest or χ2analysis (IBM-SPSS version 20, New Orchard Road, Armonk, NY). The institutional review board determined the study to be exempt from human subjects. The STROBE checklist was used and completed accordingly.Data SourcesChart abstraction and data were collected from January 1, 2011 through April 13, 2020, and medical records were obtained using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes for g-tubes: Z93.1, K94.23.ResultsA total of 110 patients were included in our study. Fifty-eight underwent nursing-only replacements; 52 were replaced by physicians. Nurse replacement success rate was 98.3% with an average stay of 22 minutes. Physician success rate was 100% with an average stay of 86 minutes. The difference between nursing and physician LOS was 64.6 minutes. No patient in either group experienced postreplacement complications.ConclusionsThe initiation of nurse-only management of dislodged g-tubes was successful, safe, and had a shorter LOS when compared with physicians in the pediatric ED.ImpactOur study determined the implications of nurse-only replacement of g-tubes in a pediatric ED. We found that nurses replacing g-tubes was equally safe and effective as physician counterparts. In addition, we found that it significantly reduced the LOS for patients, which has consequences on patient satisfaction and billing.Patient/Public ContributionNursing staff were trained in g-tube replacement using guidelines created by a nurse educator and nursing council. Patients either had their dislodged g-tubes replaced by the trained nurse or a physician and comparisons on the outcomes were made. Patients were aware of the study and consented to have their medical records accessed to make the data comparisons.Relevance to Clinical PracticeWith more than 189,000 children in the United States relying on g-tubes, nursing staff will inevitably be involved in the care of patients with such a device. In addition, as pediatric EDs continue to develop longer and longer waiting times, we must learn how to better use our nursing staff for procedures within their scope and minimize LOS. Our research demonstrates the safety, feasibility, and general benefits of having the pediatric nursing staff replace g-tubes in the ED, and it is hoped that this will lead to beneficial policy changes.What does this article contribute to the wider global community?   - Demonstrates the safety and effectiveness of nurse-only g-tube replacement- Reports on the statistically significant difference in LOS between physician and nurse replacement of g-tubes in a pediatric ED- Has the ability to lead to policy change in the pediatric ED that will allow for greater patient satisfaction and decrease patient cost

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

General Medicine,Emergency Medicine,Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3