ArticleBMC nursing2022
Adherence of critical care nurses to endotracheal suctioning guidelines: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC nursing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of an educational intervention on intensive care nurses' knowledge and practice of endotracheal suctioning: a single-group pretest-posttest study.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Development and Validation of a Nurse-Specific Scale to Assess Influencing Factors in Clinical Practice Guideline Implementation: An i-PARIHS-Based Study.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
- Article
- Enhancing Clinical Practice in Adult Airway Suctioning: A Two-Cycle Audit at Aswan University Hospital.Cureus · 2025Article
- Barriers to nurse-led delirium management in intensive care units: an integrative systematic review using COM-B model.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Revision and Psychometric Testing of the Delirium Care Self-Efficacy Scale for ICU Nurses.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- A health systems approach to critical care delivery in low-resource settings: a narrative review.Intensive care medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndotracheal suctioning (ETS) is one of the most common invasive procedures performed by critical care nurses (CCNs) to remove accumulated pulmonary secretions, ensure airway patency for adequate ventilation and oxygenation as well as prevent atelectasis in intubated patients.
objectivesTo assess the practice of CCNs in intensive care units (ICUs) before, during, and after performing the ETS procedure and identify factors affecting their practice.
methodsA cross-sectional and non-participant observational design was conducted in the ICUs of four hospitals in Hodeida city, Yemen. The data were collected using a 25-item observational checklist in the period from May to August 2019.
resultsMore than half (55%) of CCNs scored undesirable (< 50%) regarding their adherence to ETS practice guidelines while the rest scored moderate (50-75%), with none of showing desirable adherence (> 70%) to the guidelines. There was no significant association between gender, age, education level, or length of experience of CCNs in the ICUs and their practice during performance ETS procedures. However, training (p = 0.010) and receiving information about ETS (p = 0.028) significantly improved the CCNs' practice.
conclusionMost CCNs at the ICUs of Hodeida hospitals do not adhere to evidence-based practice guidelines when performing ETS procedures, possibly resulting in numerous adverse effects and complications for patients. CCNs receiving information and training show better ETS practice than do their counterparts. Therefore, it is necessary to provide the nursing staff with clear guidelines, continuous education and monitoring to improve their practices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.