Archive for October, 2011

h1

Killing Traditional Nursing Duties #3 – NPO after Midnight

October 11, 2011
fasting Buddha/ via Wikipedia Commons

By Shawn Kennedy, editor-in-chief

In early August, on our Facebook page, we asked if there were “old nursing habits” that should be killed off. We received a lot of feedback, which we described in a blog post called “Killing Traditional Nursing Duties #1.” We did another post on the answers to our second question, “When you give IM injections, what site do you most often use—dorsogluteal (upper outer quadrant of buttocks), ventrogluteal (lateral hip), or deltoid (upper arm)?” This also got many comments in response.

Our last question was this:Does your institution routinely follow ‘NPO after midnight’ for preoperative patients?” Here’s some of the comments we received on the blog:

My institution does follow the NPO after midnight for preop patients. I sometimes disagree d/t the time patients may be going to surgery. If a patient is not scheduled for the OR until the following day at 5 pm, why should they have to be NPO after midnight the night before?

…most of the younger anesthesiologists/CRNA’s allowed BLACK COFFEE to be drunk right up until time  of surgery. No dairy or sugar in it, obviously.

The facility that I work for does routinely follow ‘nothing by mouth’ after midnight guidelines. If the patient  is scheduled for a late surgery I may call the doctor and request that the orders be altered and in most cases the doctor’s are agreeable and will change the orders, writing NPO after midnight with the exception of clear liquids.

Responses on Facebook, however, showed a stricter adherence to the traditional no eating or drinking after midnight before surgery; it was fairly unanimous that institutions still follow this ancient practice (though one person did ask, “What’s npo?”!).

Well, it’s clear that this month’s CE article by Jeannette Crenshaw is sorely needed. “Preoperative Fasting: Will the Evidence Ever Be Put into Practice?” addresses the fact that despite 25 years of evidence and standards showing that NPO after midnight is not good practice, it is still used in most hospitals and preoperative practices. The evidence support clear liquids up to a few hours before surgery, and many groups have endorsed carbohydrate-rich beverages along with clear liquids up to a few hours before surgery.

So read Crenshaw’s article and disseminate it to your colleagues and clinical practice committees—practice changes should be based on evidence, and for this, the evidence is clear.

Bookmark and Share

h1

When Being Good Means Looking Bad: An Ethical Quandary for Nurses

October 7, 2011

Performance measurement, an increasingly pervasive trend in health care, is credited with significant improvements in the quality of care . . . . Even so, this is little comfort when a nurse faces a situation where an action necessary for meeting a performance measure isn’t what she or he believes is best for a particular patient. For example, falls are often tallied as a performance measure, but frail patients need to be walked; raising the head of the bed to prevent pneumonia is often counted in performance evaluation but may result in less turning of the patient, which may mean more sacral ulcers—which may or may not be tallied as a separate performance measure.

That’s from an article in this month’s AJN by nurse ethicist Doug Olsen. It’s called “When Being Good Means Looking Bad,” and is about potential unintended effects of some well-intentioned performance measures that don’t easily allow for consideration of clinical context. Olsen writes that the nurse may, in certain situations, find herself or himself faced with three highly imperfect options to choose between:

  • Conform care to get the best score on the performance measurement, although that may mean less than the best care for the patient.
  • Use deception, in the form of a work-around or an outright lie, to give the appearance of meeting the measure—while actually doing what one thinks is best. 
  • Give the best care, document accurately—and accept the consequences.

Olsen explains the ethical principles in play, weighs the options, and then offers nurses some succinct advice for finding a way forward. Please have a look and let us know if you’ve ever experienced such a conundrum.—Jacob Molyneux, senior editor

Bookmark and Share

h1

Blind Spot – At the Intersection of Mother and Nurse

October 6, 2011

By Marcy Phipps, RN, a regular contributor to this blog. Her essay, “The Soul on the Head of a Pin,” was published in the May 2010 issue of AJN.

Being a nurse has changed my reactions to situations at home. For one thing, I don’t get overexcited about non-life-threatening medical problems. I can hardly stand the thought of going to an emergency room (Steri-Strips and ice are my usual “go-to” treatment plans). I’d like to blame this on working in a trauma center—it makes sense that seeing catastrophic injuries every day tends to make less severe injuries look insignificant—but I’m not sure that completely excuses my recent diagnostic error.

My son, who’s 12, came home from school last week complaining that his hand was sore. He’d hit a wall in gym, he said, but it was a padded wall, and he hadn’t hit it very hard. Still, he was absolutely certain that, at the very least, he’d dislocated something, and that, most likely, he’d broken his hand.

To my defense, he has a history of overdramatizing situations, and I took his self-assessment with a grain of salt. Although the side of his hand was slightly swollen, nothing was bruised, and everything seemed to be moving all right.

We iced it, of course, and although hand pain didn’t seem to interfere with his usual activities, he proceeded to tell anyone who would listen that he’d broken his hand.

“Stop saying that!” I told him. “You did not break your hand!”

And so it went, for an entire week. Until his volleyball coach mentioned, kindly, that my son had been complaining quite a bit, and asked if I thought I should have his hand looked at.

So I took him for an X-ray, certain we’d be sent on our way with education about soft tissue injuries. I certainly didn’t expect to find out my son had a “boxer’s fracture” (see image above), or to find myself sitting in the office of an orthopedist I regularly see at work, explaining why it took a nurse a week to believe that her son could have a fracture in his hand.

No harm done (physically, I should say). My son graciously forgives my dismissive diagnosis, but I’m left considering the intersection of mother and nurse, and wondering which part of me I should blame for my error.

Bookmark and Share

h1

Federal Budget Battles Begin – Health Professions Education at Stake

October 3, 2011

By Shawn Kennedy, MA, RN, AJN editor-in-chief

U.S. Capitol building/Ed Siasoco, via Flickr

I’m subscribed to many listservs, mailing lists, and eNews alerts that help me keep track of news that may be important to nurses. One e-mail list I’m on is the Health Professions and Nursing Education Coalition (HPNEC), from the Association of American Medical Colleges. It closely monitors funding for health professions education.

Last week, the e-mail reported on the proposed 2012 federal budget—that is, the initial draft proposed by the House Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education departments appropriations subcommittee. Among a great deal else, this includes funding for  Medicare, the National Institutes of Health, the CDC, and medical and nursing education (Title VII and Title VIII funding).

There’s already contention over the proposal, with the Democrats claiming they had nothing to do with it. According to ranking Democratic member Rep. Norm Dick, quoted in the minority party press release: “Make no mistake: this is not a committee product. This draft bill represents the ideological position of one committee member—the subcommittee chairman.”

Among other aspects, the proposal includes cuts to all monies to Planned Parenthood (as long as it continues to provide abortion services), National Public Radio, and any programs under the Affordable Health Care for America Act.

According to the HPNEC e-mail: “The bill offers a total of $87.5 million for Title VII programs, a $185 million (67.9 percent) cut, by eliminating funding for the Title VII Health Careers Opportunity Program, scholarships for disadvantaged students, primary care medicine, Area Health Education Centers, and allied health programs, and drastically reducing some other Title VII programs. For Title VIII [nurse workforce development programs], the draft bill provides $106.828 million, a $135.6 million (55.9 percent) cut, achieved through elimination of funding for the Title VIII loan repayment and scholarship program and comprehensive geriatric education, as well as reductions to other Title VIII programs.”

The press release from the Republican committee members lauds the proposal, quoting chair Hal Rogers: “To protect critical programs and services that many Americans rely on—especially in this time of fiscal crisis—the bill takes decisive action to cut duplicative, inefficient, and wasteful spending to help get these agency budgets onto sustainable financial footing.”

While this is only the first draft and no doubt there will be much haggling and political posturing, it serves as a reminder of the current rancor in Congress, where all issues seem to be battlegrounds.

You can compare funding from the prior year with the President’s request and the proposed bill, and also read the full text of the bill.

Bookmark and Share

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 258 other followers