Results in Journal American Journal of Critical Care: 3,859
(searched for: journal_id:(1361282))
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 30, pp 77-79; doi:10.4037/ajcc2021780
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 30, pp 8-8; doi:10.4037/ajcc2021824
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 30, pp 64-71; doi:10.4037/ajcc2021753
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 30, pp 21-26; doi:10.4037/ajcc2021687
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 30; doi:10.4037/ajcc2021359
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 30, pp 72-76; doi:10.4037/ajcc2021799
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 30, pp 45-54; doi:10.4037/ajcc2021619
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 30, pp 27-35; doi:10.4037/ajcc2021725
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 30, pp 11-20; doi:10.4037/ajcc2021398
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 30, pp 4-6; doi:10.4037/ajcc2021734
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 30, pp 55-63; doi:10.4037/ajcc2021351
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 30, pp 80-82; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020537
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 30, pp 36-37; doi:10.4037/ajcc2021923
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 30; doi:10.4037/ajcc2021117
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 30, pp 83-84; doi:10.4037/ajcc2021472
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 30, pp 38-44; doi:10.4037/ajcc2021122
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 30, pp 10-10; doi:10.4037/ajcc2021103
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020810
Abstract:
Background Hospital-acquired pressure injuries disproportionately affect critical care patients. Although risk factors such as moisture, illness severity, and inadequate perfusion have been recognized, nursing skin assessment data remain unexamined in relation to the risk for hospital-acquired pressure injuries. Objective To identify factors associated with hospital-acquired pressure injuries among surgical critical care patients. The specific aim was to analyze data obtained from routine nursing skin assessments alongside other potential risk factors identified in the literature. Methods This retrospective cohort study included 5101 surgical critical care patients at a level I trauma center and academic medical center. Multivariate logistic regression using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator method identified important predictors with parsimonious representation. Use of specialty pressure redistribution beds was included in the model as a known predictive factor because specialty beds are a common preventive intervention. Results Independent risk factors identified by logistic regression were skin irritation (rash or diffuse, nonlocalized redness) (odds ratio, 1.788; 95% CI, 1.404-2.274; P < .001), minimum Braden Scale score (odds ratio, 0.858; 95% CI, 0.818-0.899; P < .001), and duration of intensive care unit stay before the hospital-acquired pressure injury developed (odds ratio, 1.003; 95% CI, 1.003-1.004; P < .001). Conclusions The strongest predictor was irritated skin, a potentially modifiable risk factor. Irritated skin should be treated and closely monitored, and the cause should be eliminated to allow the skin to heal.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 422-428; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020733
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 429-438; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020966
Abstract:
Background Participant retention is vital for longitudinal studies. Home visits may increase retention, but little is known about the subset of patients they benefit. Objective To evaluate patient-related variables associated with home visits. Methods In a 5-year, longitudinal, multisite, prospective study of 195 survivors of acute respiratory distress syndrome, in-person assessments were conducted at a research clinic. Home visits were offered to participants who could not attend the clinic. Associations between having a home visit, prior follow-up visit status, and baseline and in-hospital patient variables were evaluated with multivariable, random-intercept logistic regression models. The association between home visits and patients’ posthospital clinical status was evaluated with a subsequent regression model adjusted for these variables. Results Participants had a median age of 49 years and were 56% male and 58% White. The following had independent associations with home visits (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI]): age (per year: 1.03 [1.00-1.05]) and immediately preceding visit incomplete (2.46 [1.44-4.19]) or at home (8.24 [4.57-14.86]). After adjustment for prior-visit status and baseline and hospitalization variables, these posthospital patient outcome variables were associated with a subsequent home visit: instrumental activities of daily living (≥ 2 vs < 2 dependencies: 2.32 [1.29-4.17]), EQ-5D utility score (per 0.1-point decrease: 1.15 [1.02-1.30]), and 6-minute walk test (per 10-percentage-point decrease in percent-predicted distance: 1.50 [1.26-1.79]). Conclusions Home visits were important for retaining older and more physically impaired study participants, helping reduce selection bias caused by excluding them.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 493-494; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020827
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 448-449; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020415
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 439-447; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020744
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 419-419; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020411
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 468-478; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020884
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 458-467; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020741
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020886
Abstract:
Background Conflicts in medical settings affect both team function and patient care, yet a standardized curriculum for conflict management in clinical teams does not exist. Objectives To evaluate the effects of an educational intervention for conflict management on knowledge and perceptions and to identify trends in preferred conflict management style among intensive care unit workers. Methods A conflict management education intervention was created for an intensive care team. The intervention was 1 hour long and incorporated the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument as well as conflict management concepts, self-reflection, and active learning through discussion and reviewing clinical cases. Descriptive statistics were prepared on the participants’ preferred conflict management modes. A pretest/posttest was analyzed to evaluate knowledge and perceptions of conflict before and after the intervention, and 3 open-ended questions on the posttest were reviewed for categories. Results Forty-nine intensive care providers participated in the intervention. The largest portion of participants had an avoiding conflict management mode (32%), followed by compromising (30%), accommodating (25%), collaborating (9%), and competing (5%). Pretest/posttest data were collected for 31 participants and showed that knowledge (P < .001) and perception (P = .004) scores increased significantly after the conflict management intervention. Conclusions The conflict management educational intervention improved the participants’ knowledge and affected perceptions. Categorization of open-ended questions suggested that intensive care providers are interested in concrete information that will help with conflict resolution, and some participants understood that mindfulness and awareness would improve professional interactions or reduce conflict.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 415-417; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020334
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020561
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 489-492; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020694
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 450-457; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020136
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 480-483; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020934
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
Comment
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 418-418; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020542
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 418-418; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020519
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 484-488; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020132
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 479-479; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020231
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020149
Abstract:
The theory of posttraumatic growth arose from accounts of various trauma survivors experiencing not only distress but also growth and change. An intensive care unit admission is an unplanned, sudden, and traumatic experience, and many survivors have posttraumatic stress that can lead to posttraumatic stress disorder. Survivors leave the intensive care unit with new functional impairments that drive depression, and they frequently experience anxiety. Amidst the stress of understanding the trauma of an intensive care unit admission, survivors can grow in their world views, relationships, and sense of self. Understanding posttraumatic growth in intensive care unit survivors will inform health care providers on how to help survivors understand their new difficulties after an intensive care unit stay and facilitate growth. This article is a conceptual review of posttraumatic growth, identifiers of posttraumatic growth, and how the tenets of the posttraumatic growth theory apply to intensive care unit survivors. Health care professionals, specifically nurses, can incorporate practices into their care during and after the intensive care unit stay that encourage understanding and positive accommodation of new difficulties brought on by the intensive care unit hospitalization to support survivor growth. Opportunities for research include incorporating posttraumatic growth assessments into post–intensive care unit clinics, self-help materials, and various programs or therapies. Outcomes associated with posttraumatic growth are listed to suggest directions for research questions concerning posttraumatic growth in intensive care unit survivors.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 350-357; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020181
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 390-395; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020120
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 369-370; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020683
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 358-368; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020960
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 380-389; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020831
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 398-402; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020492
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 340-349; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020953
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 338-338; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020673
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 371-378; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020129
The publisher has not yet granted permission to display this abstract.
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 396-396; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020106
American Journal of Critical Care; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020139
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 403-406; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020421
American Journal of Critical Care, Volume 29, pp 407-408; doi:10.4037/ajcc2020779