Scholarlink

Objective <p>To describe barriers and strategies amongst healthcare professionals (HCP) for optimal non-invasive respiratory support (NRS) provision in extremely preterm infants.</p> Study design <p>A cross-sectional web-based anonymized 19-question survey was sent to HCPs across Canadian tertiary care NICUs. The survey inquired about perspectives on NRS devices and management strategies, respiratory event monitoring, NRS failure, and possible solutions.</p> Result <p>391 responses from 61 physicians, 173 nurses, and 147 respiratory therapists were analyzed. HCP perspectives varied regarding appropriateness of different NRS settings and interfaces, documentation of cardiorespiratory events, and prevention of NRS failure. Obtaining effective NRS was deemed challenging by 48% of HCPs. NRS training was deemed adequate by 89% of respiratory therapists and 78% of physicians, but only 56% of nurses.</p> Conclusion <p>Substantial interprofessional variations exist in perceived benefits of various aspects of NRS. Better evidence on NRS modalities/settings, together with development of interdisciplinary guidelines and enhanced training, might reduce variability.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Interprofessional perspectives on non-invasive respiratory support practices in extremely preterm infants: a Canadian survey

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年4月12日

查看全文
  • Tugba Alarcon Martinez,
  • Elissa Remmer,
  • Stephanie Mardakis,
  • Marisa Leone,
  • Johanne Boyer,
  • Shasha Lv,
  • Marc Beltempo,
  • Guilherme Sant’Anna,
  • Wissam Shalish

摘要

Objective

To describe barriers and strategies amongst healthcare professionals (HCP) for optimal non-invasive respiratory support (NRS) provision in extremely preterm infants.

Study design

A cross-sectional web-based anonymized 19-question survey was sent to HCPs across Canadian tertiary care NICUs. The survey inquired about perspectives on NRS devices and management strategies, respiratory event monitoring, NRS failure, and possible solutions.

Result

391 responses from 61 physicians, 173 nurses, and 147 respiratory therapists were analyzed. HCP perspectives varied regarding appropriateness of different NRS settings and interfaces, documentation of cardiorespiratory events, and prevention of NRS failure. Obtaining effective NRS was deemed challenging by 48% of HCPs. NRS training was deemed adequate by 89% of respiratory therapists and 78% of physicians, but only 56% of nurses.

Conclusion

Substantial interprofessional variations exist in perceived benefits of various aspects of NRS. Better evidence on NRS modalities/settings, together with development of interdisciplinary guidelines and enhanced training, might reduce variability.