Introduction Many authors have written about the need to treat patients closer to their beds, in order to observe them more as distinct people. The FAST HUG mnemonic, which consists of a checklist, was suggested as an idea to be employed everyday, by professionals dealing with patients who are critically ill. Minding these questions and motivated by an idea of follow patients' treatment closer, we have put into practice the instrument developed by Jean-Louis Vincent, evaluating the seven most important procedures in critically ill patients, and performed the FAST HUG. This checklist consists of seven items to be evaluated: Feeding, Analgesia, Sedation, Thromboembolic prophylaxis, Head-of-bed elevation, stress Ulcer prevention, and Glucose control. Knowing that the pressure ulcer is one of the challenges faced by ICU nurses, related to patients' need to stay at rest, to be under rigorous control or more complex therapy, it was decided to create the eighth item on the checklist: S, for skin. It stands for skin treatment, with the techniques used in the unit (Braden Scale), monitoring and evaluating closer skin integrity, and allowing nurses to calculate the scoring average of the Braden Scale, and greater incidence of ulcer in interned patients. Objective To expose the shortcomings found during the FAST HUG application, and to show results obtained with the eighth item of the FAST HUG mnemonic: S-Skin. Methods A descriptive study, based on institutional data, was carried out in the adult ICU of a private hospital. It was performed from 2 to 27 June 2008, except on weekends. Three hundred and twenty-three patients were involved. The checklist was carried out during the afternoons by the head nurse, or the assistant nurse of the unit. In order to do this job, a spreadsheet was elaborated to control data, updated every week. This spreadsheet provided graphics for a more objective control of the results obtained. The idea was exposed to the team, during a training program, and so we started the activities. Results and discussion For 20 days of the checklist, 323 patients were evaluated for the eight items. The real shortcomings most frequently found were related to thromboembolic prophylaxis (85%) and glucose control (90%). These shortcomings were immediately evaluated and, depending on this analysis, this item would go on or not, according to the patient's clinical situation. The shortcomings found were tracked just as they were detected, and their cause would be discussed in a multidisciplinary group, and a solution was found. If the item was not observed, it would be 1. Vincent JL: Give your patient a fast hug (at least) once a day.
Objetivo: identificar o custo direto médio da inserção de cateter venoso central de longa permanência em pacientes submetidos à hemodiálise convencional em um hospital público de ensino e pesquisa.Método: pesquisa quantitativa, exploratório-descritiva, realizada em um Centro de Diálise, em São Paulo, Brasil entre novembro e dezembro/2019. Calculou-se o custo direto médio multiplicandose o tempo despendido por profissionais de saúde pelo custo unitário da mão de obra direta, somando-se aos custos de insumos.Resultados: o custo direto médio total correspondeu a US$134,56 (DP±3,65), sendo US$107,01 (DP±0,23) relativos ao custo com material, US$22,10 (DP±3,63) com a mão de obra direta da equipe de inserção do cateter, US$4,65 (DP±0,00) com custo de medicamentos e US$0,80 (DP±0,15) com custo de soluções.Conclusão: constatou-se o impacto dos custos com recursos materiais e a imprescindibilidade da sua alocação racional, especialmente nos hospitais públicos de ensino e pesquisa, que possuem recursos financeiros limitados.
Objective: To measure the average direct cost of procedures performed by health professionals, in a Dialysis Center, for the management of complications of vascular access for hemodialysis. Method: Quantitative, exploratory-descriptive case study type research. The average direct cost was calculated by multiplying the time spent by health professionals by the unit cost of direct labor, adding this to the input costs (materials/ medicines/solutions). Results: The following average direct costs were obtained: US$0.72, US$2.00 and US$1.41 for “administration of easy-to-dilute, difficult-to-dilute, and undiluted antibiotics”, respectively; $2.61 for “central venous catheter dressing with topical antibiotic”; $48.05 for “alteplase infusion”; US$183.68 for “insertion of central venous catheter for hemodialysis”; and $1.31 for “arteriovenous fistula puncture”. Conclusion: Material and drug costs significantly contributed to the composition of the average total direct cost of most procedures.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.