Veldhuis Peter, Melse Maartje, Mullaart Nieke
Department of Emergency Medicine, OLVG Oost, Postbus 95500, 1090 HM, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Emergency Medicine, Dijklander Ziekenhuis, Postbus 600, 1620 AR, Hoorn, The Netherlands.
Int J Emerg Med. 2021 Feb 24;14(1):15. doi: 10.1186/s12245-021-00334-z.
Nasal inhalation of isopropyl alcohol (IPA) seems an effective anti-emetic for the symptomatic treatment of nausea in the emergency department (ED) compared to conventional anti-emetics (Ondansetron and Metoclopramide). However, it is not yet known what the practical consequences are related to the use of IPA in the ED.
The purpose of this study was to assess the practical implications for patient care associated with IPA use and to evaluate the viability of permanent implementation of IPA inhalation as a first-line therapy for nausea in the ED.
We conducted a prospective, single-center implementation study comparing ED-based care for nauseated patients before (n=106) and after (n=104) the introduction of IPA. We evaluated the treatment process and cost and assessed implementation using a survey based on recommended implementation outcome measures.
Comparing baseline phase to implementation phase, we found a significant increase in the percentage of patients receiving nausea treatment (66.0% versus 97.1%; p<0.001) and a reduction in time to treatment initiation (7 versus 1 min, p<0.001). Additionally, IPA introduction was associated with a decrease in the administration of conventional anti-emetics (0.52 versus 0.23 administrations per patient, p<0.001) and a notable drop in treatment cost (€1.33 versus €0.67 per patient). Nurses were content with IPA implementation and regarded definitive implementation as feasible and sustainable.
Implementation of IPA as the first-line nausea treatment in the ED can increase the quality of care and improve care efficiency. Definitive implementation of IPA as a first-line treatment in the ED is both viable and practically feasible.
NTR, NL7717 , Registered on March 23, 2018 - Retrospectively registered.
与传统止吐药(昂丹司琼和甲氧氯普胺)相比,急诊室(ED)中经鼻吸入异丙醇(IPA)似乎是一种治疗恶心症状的有效止吐方法。然而,目前尚不清楚在急诊室使用IPA会产生哪些实际后果。
本研究的目的是评估使用IPA对患者护理的实际影响,并评估将IPA吸入作为急诊室恶心一线治疗方法长期实施的可行性。
我们进行了一项前瞻性单中心实施研究,比较了引入IPA前后急诊室对恶心患者的护理情况(引入前n = 106,引入后n = 104)。我们评估了治疗过程和成本,并使用基于推荐实施结果指标的调查来评估实施情况。
将基线期与实施期进行比较,我们发现接受恶心治疗的患者百分比显著增加(66.0%对97.1%;p < 0.001),治疗开始时间缩短(7分钟对1分钟,p < 0.001)。此外,引入IPA与传统止吐药的使用减少有关(每位患者0.52次对0.23次,p < 0.001),治疗成本显著下降(每位患者1.33欧元对0.67欧元)。护士对IPA的实施感到满意,并认为最终实施是可行和可持续的。
在急诊室将IPA作为恶心的一线治疗方法可以提高护理质量并改善护理效率。在急诊室将IPA作为一线治疗方法最终实施是可行且切实可行的。
NTR,NL7717,于2018年3月23日注册——回顾性注册。