Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28088171›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2017

Assessing the sustainability of daily chlorhexidine bathing in the intensive care unit of a Veteran's Hospital by examining nurses' perspectives and experiences.

Jackson S Musuuza, Tonya J Roberts, Pascale Carayon, Nasia Safdar

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Exploring facilitators and barriers to daily chlorhexidine gluconate bathing in adult patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jackson S MusuuzaWilliam S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Affairs Hospital, Madison, WI, USA.
Tonya J RobertsWilliam S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Affairs Hospital, Madison, WI, USA.
Pascale CarayonDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Nasia SafdarWilliam S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Affairs Hospital, Madison, WI, USA. ns2@medicine.wisc.edu.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

Implementation of Chlorhexidine Bathing to Reduce Healthcare-Associated Infections-the Icare studyR18HS024039 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI SAFDAR, NASIA · 2015 to 2017
$1.5M
AHRQ HHS R18 HS024039
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDaily bathing with chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) of intensive care unit (ICU) patients has been shown to reduce healthcare-associated infections and colonization by multidrug resistant organisms. The objective of this project was to describe the process of daily CHG bathing and identify the barriers and facilitators that can influence its successful adoption and sustainability in an ICU of a Veterans Administration Hospital.

methodsWe conducted 26 semi-structured interviews with a convenience sample of 4 nurse managers (NMs), 13 registered nurses (RNs) and 9 health care technicians (HCTs) working in the ICU. We used qualitative content analysis to code and analyze the data. Dedoose software was used to facilitate data management and coding. Trustworthiness and scientific integrity of the data were ensured by having two authors corroborate the coding process, conducting member checks and keeping an audit trail of all the decisions made.

resultsDuration of the interviews was 15 to 39 min (average = 26 min). Five steps of bathing were identified: 1) decision to give a bath; 2) ability to give a bath; 3) decision about which soap to use; 4) delegation of a bath; and 5) getting assistance to do a bath. The bathing process resulted in one of the following three outcomes: 1) complete bath; 2) interrupted bath; and 3) bath not done. The outcome was influenced by a combination of barriers and facilitators at each step. Most barriers were related to perceived workload, patient factors, and scheduling. Facilitators were mainly organizational factors such as the policy of daily CHG bathing, the consistent supply of CHG soap, and support such as reminders to conduct CHG baths by nurse managers.

conclusionsPatient bathing in ICUs is a complex process that can be hindered and interrupted by numerous factors. The decision to use CHG soap for bathing was only one of 5 steps of bathing and was largely influenced by scheduling/workload and patient factors such as clinical stability, hypersensitivity to CHG, patient refusal, presence of IV lines and general hygiene. Interventions that address the organizational, provider, and patient barriers to bathing could improve adherence to a daily CHG bathing protocol.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelBathsIntensive Care UnitsNursesAllied Health PersonnelAnti-Infective Agents, LocalChlorhexidineCross InfectionDrug HypersensitivityHospitals, VeteransHumansHygieneNurse AdministratorsQualitative ResearchTime FactorsWorkloadAnti-Infective Agents, LocalChlorhexidinechlorhexidine gluconate

Identifiers

PMID28088171
PMCPMC5237510
OpenAlexW2574891407

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.