Suppr超能文献

围手术期两种芳香疗法给药方法的易用性与偏好性比较。

Comparison of the Ease-of-use and Preference Between Two Aromatherapy Delivery Methods in the Perioperative Setting.

作者信息

Penoyer Elizabeth Dale, Ruiz Alison, DeGroot Keely, Middleton Aurea, Skinner Lauren, Valentin Leticia, Kollstedt Kelly, Flores Joy

机构信息

Orlando Health Strategic Innovations, Orlando Health, Corp, Orlando, FL.

Orlando Health Strategic Innovations, Advent Health, Orlando, Orlando, FL.

出版信息

J Perianesth Nurs. 2025 Aug;40(4):945-948.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jopan.2024.10.015. Epub 2025 Jan 21.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Nurses at the study hospitals had implemented aromatherapy as an evidence-based intervention to alleviate nausea, pain, and anxiety in patients in the perioperative setting. Initially, they were approved to administer aromatherapy using large, multidose bottles with gauze as the method of delivery; however, nurses recognized that there were many disadvantages to using this method. This led to a nurse-driven initiative to create a new delivery method for aromatherapy with the aid of the Center for Innovation at the organization. Single, individually wrapped packets were developed to overcome the obstacles faced by using the bottled method in partnership with the industry. The purpose of the study was to evaluate nurses' perceptions of the ease-of-use and preference of delivery method of aromatherapy.

DESIGN

A prospective, comparative, before-and-after observational survey design was used to answer the research question.

METHODS

Nurses in 2 perioperative hospital settings in the system used the bottled method for 4 months and completed a System Usability Scale (SUS) survey at the end of that period. The individually wrapped method was then used for the next 4 months, followed by another evaluation using the SUS. Participants were asked to choose which method they preferred and their perception of effectiveness of aromatherapy in the perioperative setting and its use as a good adjunct for patient experience on a 5-point Likert scale.

FINDINGS

Twenty-one nurses participated in the bottled method group (pre) and 30 were in the single-packet group (post). An independent sample t test was used to evaluate the differences in the pre- and post-SUS scores. Mean pre scores were 62.5 (±17.8) with an SUS rating of "D" with marginal acceptance. Mean post scores were 81.8 (±12.5) with an SUS rating of "A" with excellent acceptability and were significantly different (P < .000). Nursing perceptions that aromatherapy is a good adjunct for patient experience were positive (3.97/5) and were effective in use in the perioperative setting (4.4/5). Most nurses indicated that the packet delivery method was preferred over the bottled method.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurses' perceptions favored the use of the single-packet delivery method of aromatherapy. A score of 81 on the SUS approximates between the 92nd and 93rd percentile of product use SUS scores. Thus, the findings indicate high ease-of-use for the single-packet version of aromatherapy. Nurse-led innovations, such as this, can impact how care is delivered in the clinical setting.

摘要

目的

研究医院的护士已将芳香疗法作为一种循证干预措施,用于缓解围手术期患者的恶心、疼痛和焦虑。最初,她们被批准使用带有纱布的大剂量多用途瓶子来实施芳香疗法;然而,护士们认识到使用这种方法存在许多缺点。这促使护士主导了一项倡议,在该机构的创新中心的帮助下,为芳香疗法创造一种新的给药方法。与行业合作开发了单个独立包装的小包装,以克服使用瓶装方法所面临的障碍。本研究的目的是评估护士对芳香疗法使用便利性和给药方法偏好的看法。

设计

采用前瞻性、对比性、前后观察性调查设计来回答研究问题。

方法

该系统中两家围手术期医院的护士使用瓶装方法4个月,并在该阶段结束时完成系统可用性量表(SUS)调查。然后在接下来的4个月使用独立包装方法,随后再次使用SUS进行评估。参与者被要求选择他们更喜欢哪种方法,以及他们对围手术期芳香疗法有效性的看法,以及其作为改善患者体验的良好辅助手段的看法,采用5分李克特量表进行评分。

结果

21名护士参与了瓶装方法组(前期),30名护士参与了独立包装组(后期)。采用独立样本t检验来评估SUS评分前后的差异。前期平均评分为62.5(±17.8)分,SUS评级为“D”,勉强可接受。后期平均评分为81.8(±12.5)分,SUS评级为“A”,具有极佳的可接受性,且差异具有统计学意义(P < .000)。护士们认为芳香疗法是改善患者体验的良好辅助手段的看法较为积极(3.97/5),并且在围手术期使用有效(4.4/5)。大多数护士表示更喜欢独立包装方法而非瓶装方法。

结论

护士们的看法倾向于使用芳香疗法的独立包装给药方法。SUS评分为81分大约处于产品使用SUS评分的第92至93百分位之间。因此,研究结果表明独立包装版芳香疗法具有很高的易用性。诸如此类由护士主导的创新可以影响临床环境中的护理提供方式。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验