中国循证儿科杂志 ›› 2024, Vol. 19 ›› Issue (4): 287-293.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-5501.2024.04.005

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

危重患儿院内转运实践现状及障碍因素的田野研究

李阳1,3,王颖雯2a,3,顾莺2a,陈伟明2b,胡静2a,马健2c,金芸2b,杨玉霞2b,沈伟杰2b,王文超2c,胡沈洁2c,缑兆阳2a   

  1. 1 复旦大学护理学院上海,200032;2 复旦大学附属儿科医院 上海,201102:a 护理部,b 儿童重症监护病房,c 急诊科;3 共同第一作者


  • 收稿日期:2024-07-17 修回日期:2024-10-16 出版日期:2024-08-25 发布日期:2024-10-31
  • 通讯作者: 顾莺,陈伟明

Current practice and barriers of the intrahospital transport for critically ill children:A field study

LI Yang1,3, WANG Yingwen2a,3, GU Ying2a, CHEN Weiming2b, HU Jing2a, MA Jian2c, JIN Yun2b, YANG Yuxia2b, SHEN Weijie2b, WANG Wenchao2c, HU Shenjie2c, GOU Zhaoyang2a   

  1. 1 School of Nursing, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200032, China; 2 Children's Hospital of Fudan University, a Nursing Department, b Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, c Emergency Department, Shanghai, 201102, China
  • Received:2024-07-17 Revised:2024-10-16 Online:2024-08-25 Published:2024-10-31
  • Contact: GU Ying, email: guying0128@aliyun.com; CHEN Weiming, eamil: Weiming_chen@fudan.edu.cn

摘要: 背景:少有对指南推荐意见依从性和实施障碍因素的研究。 目的:了解急诊科和PICU医护人员对《住院患儿实施院内转运临床实践指南(2023版)》(简称指南)的依从性及其障碍因素。 设计:田野研究。 方法:以复旦大学附属儿科医院(我院)急诊、PICU、普通病房3个部门为田野地,通过参与医护人员对危重患儿院内转运的实践,以田野笔记的方式描述我院急诊科或PICU执业的医护人员向普通病房单向转运的现况,分析指南推荐意见实施面临的障碍因素。基于指南第1~5条推荐意见,参考指南PICU至目标科室流程,转化为3个环节(转运前、转运中和到达转入科室)10项具体指标,通过描述性观察和访谈、焦点观察和选择性观察采集指标素材,采用题纲式分析法,从田野笔记逐篇提取基线数据,并分析具体指标的依从性和实施的障碍因素。 主要结局指标:依从指南第1~5条推荐意见的障碍因素。 结果:2024年1月1日至3月21日在我院对25名医护人员(急诊科7名护士,PICU 7名医生和11名护士)实施的49例次危重患儿院内转运进行了观察,从急诊科转运至PICU 10例次,从PICU转运至内科和外科病区分别为18和21例次。参与院内转运的25名医护人员,年龄(31.3±5.0)岁,49例次转运中,患儿年龄(70.0±48.6)月,平均转运时长(16.1±6.0)min,平均床旁交接时间(6.8±3.5)min。床旁交接中断11例次,在转运过程中记录到2起不良事件,分别为忘记携带鼻饲奶和患儿在转运途中发生呕吐。转运前、转运中和到达转入科室3个环节共涉及10个指标,基本符合指南推荐意见的为转运决策、安置患儿和提问3个指标;不完全符合指南推荐意见的为病情监测、电话沟通、转运规划3个指标;不符合指南推荐意见的为转运人员配备、设备和药品配备、评估与记录和病情交接4个指标;建议接纳患儿准备指标为指南推荐意见。指南实施面临的潜在障碍因素包括:医护人员变革实践积极性不高、转运部门间缺乏有效沟通机制、推荐意见与临床情境差距大、指南部分证据依从性不佳、指南推荐意见创新因素不足。 结论:指南推荐意见在危重患儿院内转运中依从性不佳,障碍因素包括:医护人员对院内转运安全性认知不足,指南推荐意见与院内转运临床情境有差距。

关键词: 儿童, 院内转运, 田野研究, 障碍因素分析

Abstract: Background:Few studies have focused on the adherence to and implementation barriers of clinical practice guideline recommendations. Objective:To assess compliance with the Clinical Practice Guidelines for IntraHospital Transport of Pediatric Patients (2023) among medical staff in the emergency department and PICU and to identify the implementation barriers. Design:Field study Methods:The research was carried out in the emergency department, PICU, and general wards of Children's Hospital of Fudan University. Through participation in the practice of medical staff during intrahospital transport of critically ill children, field notes were used to describe the current situation of oneway transport from the emergency department or PICU to general wards, as well as to analyze the barriers to implementing recommendations in the guideline. Based on recommendations 15 of the guideline, the PICUtotargetdepartment process (Appendix 2G in the guideline), was divided into three phases (pretransport, during transport, and upon arrival at the receiving department) and 10 specific indicators. Descriptive observation, interviews, focus observation, and selective observation were employed to collect data. A template analysis method was used to extract baseline data from the field notes and analyze compliance with specific indicators and barriers. Main outcome measures:Barriers to adhering to recommendations of 15 in the guideline. Results:From January 1st to March 21st, 2024, 49 intrahospital transports of critically ill children involving 25 medical staff (7 emergency nurses, 7 PICU doctors, and 11 PICU nurses) were observed. Ten transports were from the emergency department to the PICU, and 18 and 21 were from the PICU to internal and surgical wards, respectively. The 25 participating medical staff had an average age of 31.3±5.0 years, and the children transported (49 cases) had an average age of 70.0±48.6 months. The average transport time was 16.1±6.0 minutes, with an average bedside handoff time of 6.8±3.5 minutes. Bedside handoffs were interrupted in 11 cases, and two adverse events were recorded during transport: forgetting to carry tube feeding and a child vomiting en route. The 10 indicators across the three phases of transport (pretransport, during transport, and upon arrival at the receiving department) showed partial compliance with the guideline recommendations. The transport decisionmaking, child placement, and inquiry indicators generally aligned with the guideline; the monitoring, telephone communication, and transport planning indicators partially complied, while transport personnel, equipment and medication preparation, evaluation and documentation, and handoff of the child's condition did not meet the guidelines The preparation for receiving the child was in line with the recommendations. Potential barriers to guideline implementation included low enthusiasm among medical staff for adopting new practices, lack of effective communication mechanisms between departments, gaps between recommended practice and clinical situations, poor adherence to specific guideline evidence, and insufficient innovation in the guideline recommendations. Conclusion:Adherence to the guideline recommendations for intrahospital transport of critically ill children is poor. Barriers include insufficient awareness among medical staff regarding the safety of intrahospital transport and a gap between the guideline recommendations and actual clinical transport scenarios.

Key words: Children, Intra-hospital transport, Field study, Barrier factor analysis