The study raised concern about all aspects of tracheal suctioning and has highlighted the need for changes in practice, clinical guidelines and focused practice-based education.

Endotracheal suctioning is a frequently performed procedure that has many associated risks and complications. It is imperative that nurses are aware of these risks and are able to practise according to current research recommendations. This study was designed to examine to what extent intensive care nurses' knowledge and practice of endotracheal suctioning is based on research evidence, to investigate the relationships between knowledge and practice, and to evaluate the effectiveness of a research-based teaching programme. This quasi-experimental study was a randomized, controlled, single-blinded comparison of two research-based teaching programmes, with 16 intensive care nurses, using non-participant observation and a self-report questionnaire. Initial baseline data revealed a low level of knowledge for many participants, which was also reflected in practice, as suctioning was performed against many of the research recommendations. Following teaching, significant improvements were seen in both knowledge and practice. Four weeks later these differences were generally sustained, and provide evidence of the effectiveness of the educational intervention. The study raised concern about all aspects of endotracheal suctioning and highlighted the need for changes in nursing practice, with clinical guidelines and focused practice-based education.

BackgroundTwenty-four hour nursing care involves shift work including 12-h shifts. England is unusual in deploying a mix of shift patterns. International evidence on the effects of such shifts is growing. A secondary analysis of data collected in England exploring outcomes with 12-h shifts examined the association between shift length, job satisfaction, scheduling flexibility, care quality, patient safety, and care left undone.MethodsData were collected from a questionnaire survey of nurses in a sample of English hospitals, conducted as part of the RN4CAST study, an EU 7th Framework funded study. The sample comprised 31 NHS acute hospital Trusts from 401 wards, in 46 acute hospital sites. Descriptive analysis included frequencies, percentages and mean scores by shift length, working beyond contracted hours and day or night shift. Multi-level regression models established statistical associations between shift length and nurse self-reported measures.ResultsSeventy-four percent (1898) of nurses worked a day shift and 26% (670) a night shift. Most Trusts had a mixture of shifts lengths. Self-reported quality of care was higher amongst nurses working ≤8 h (15.9%) compared to those working longer hours (20.0 to 21.1%). The odds of poor quality care were 1.64 times higher for nurses working ≥12 h (OR = 1.64, 95% CI 1.18–2.28, p = 0.003).Mean ‘care left undone’ scores varied by shift length: 3.85 (≤8 h), 3.72 (8.01–10.00 h), 3.80 (10.01–11.99 h) and were highest amongst those working ≥12 h (4.23) (p < 0.001). The rate of care left undone was 1.13 times higher for nurses working ≥12 h (RR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.06–1.20, p < 0.001).Job dissatisfaction was higher the longer the shift length: 42.9% (≥12 h (OR = 1.51, 95% CI 1.17–1.95, p = .001); 35.1% (≤8 h) 45.0% (8.01–10.00 h), 39.5% (10.01–11.99 h).ConclusionsOur findings add to the growing international body of evidence reporting that ≥12 shifts are associated with poor ratings of quality of care and higher rates of care left undone. Future research should focus on how 12-h shifts can be optimised to minimise potential risks.

No abstract