Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31879072›Full record

ArticleJoint Commission journal on quality and patient safety2020

Persistent Barriers to Timely Catheter Removal Identified from Clinical Observations and Interviews.

Martha Quinn, Jessica M Ameling, Jane Forman, Sarah L Krein, Milisa Manojlovich, Karen E Fowler, Elizabeth A King, Jennifer Meddings

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. A collaborative approach for patient safety.Journal of infection prevention · 2021
    Article
  11. Review
  12. 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

8 authors.

Martha Quinn
Jessica M Ameling
Jane Forman
Sarah L Krein
Milisa Manojlovich
Karen E Fowler
Elizabeth A King
Jennifer Meddings

Funding

Enhancing Patient Safety through Cognition & Communication: The "M-Safety Lab"P30HS024385 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI SAINT, SANJAY K · 2015 to 2015
$4.0M
Targeting Hospital-Acquired Complications: Impact on the Care of Complex PatientsK08HS019767 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI MEDDINGS, JENNIFER ANN · 2010 to 2014
$758k
AHRQ HHS K08 HS019767AHRQ HHS P30 HS024385
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIndwelling urinary and vascular catheters are valuable devices in patient care, but prolonged or unnecessary use increases the risk of infectious and noninfectious catheter harms.

methodsTo understand persistent barriers to detecting and removing unnecessary catheters, researchers conducted a multimethod qualitative study that included observations and in-person interviews with clinicians working on a progressive care unit of a large hospital. Observations consisted of shadowing nurses during shift change and while admitting patients, and observing physicians during morning rounds. Observational data were gathered using unstructured field notes. Interviews were conducted using a semistructured guide, audio-recorded, and transcribed. Qualitative content analysis was conducted to identify main themes.

resultsBarriers to timely removal identified during 19 interviews with clinicians and 133 hours of field observations included physicians not routinely reviewing catheter necessity during rounds, catheters going unnoticed or hidden under clothing, common use of "Do Not Remove" orders, and little or no discussion of catheters among clinicians. Five overall themes emerged: (1) Catheter data are hard to find, not accurate, or not available; (2) Catheter removal is not a priority; (3) Confusion exists about who has authority to remove catheters; (4) There is a lack of agreement on, and awareness of, standard protocols and indications for removal; and (5) Communication barriers among clinicians create challenges.

conclusionTo address barriers and facilitate detection and timely removal, clinicians need ready access to accurate catheter data, more clearly delineated clinician roles for prompting removal, effective tools to facilitate discussions about catheter use, and standardized catheter removal protocols.

Indexed as

Catheters, IndwellingPhysiciansDevice RemovalHospitalsHumansQualitative ResearchUrinary Catheterization

Identifiers

PMID31879072
PMCPMC7244360
OpenAlexW2995388588

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.