We found a match
Your institution may have rights to this item. Sign in to continue.
- Title
COVID-19 Intensive Care—Evaluation of Public Information Sources and Current Standards of Care in German Intensive Care Units: A Cross Sectional Online Survey on Intensive Care Staff in Germany.
- Authors
Werner, Anne; Popp, Maria; Fichtner, Falk; Holzmann-Littig, Christopher; Kranke, Peter; Steckelberg, Anke; Lühnen, Julia; Redlich, Lisa Marie; Dickel, Steffen; Grimm, Clemens; Moerer, Onnen; Nothacker, Monika; Seeber, Christian
- Abstract
Backround: In February 2021, the first formal evidence and consensus-based (S3) guidelines for the inpatient treatment of patients with COVID-19 were published in Germany and have been updated twice during 2021. The aim of the present study is to re-evaluate the dissemination pathways and strategies for ICU staff (first evaluation in December 2020 when previous versions of consensus-based guidelines (S2k) were published) and question selected aspects of guideline adherence of standard care for patients with COVID-19 in the ICU. Methods: We conducted an anonymous online survey among German intensive care staff from 11 October 2021 to 11 November 2021. We distributed the survey via e-mail in intensive care facilities and requested redirection to additional intensive care staff (snowball sampling). Results: There was a difference between the professional groups in the number, selection and qualitative assessment of information sources about COVID-19. Standard operating procedures were most frequently used by all occupational groups and received a high quality rating. Physicians preferred sources for active information search (e.g., medical journals), while nurses predominantly used passive consumable sources (e.g., every-day media). Despite differences in usage behaviour, the sources were rated similarly in terms of the quality of the information on COVID-19. The trusted organizations have not changed over time. The use of guidelines was frequently stated and highly recommended. The majority of the participants reported guideline-compliant treatment. Nevertheless, there were certain variations in the use of medication as well as the criteria chosen for discontinuing non-invasive ventilation (NIV) compared to guideline recommendations. Conclusions: An adequate external source of information for nursing staff is lacking, the usual sources of physicians are only appropriate for the minority of nursing staff. The self-reported use of guidelines is high.
- Subjects
GERMANY; INTENSIVE care units; CONSENSUS (Social sciences); COVID-19; CROSS-sectional method; INTERNET; MANN Whitney U Test; MEDICAL protocols; SURVEYS; HEALTH; INFORMATION resources; QUESTIONNAIRES; SCALE analysis (Psychology); DESCRIPTIVE statistics; RESEARCH funding; PATIENT care; STATISTICAL sampling; PHYSICIANS; DATA analysis software; EMAIL
- Publication
Healthcare (2227-9032), 2022, Vol 10, Issue 7, p1315
- ISSN
2227-9032
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.3390/healthcare10071315