Search

Background Readmission after percutaneous coronary intervention is common in the early postdischarge period, often linked to limited opportunity for education and preparation for self-care. Attending a nurse-led clinic within 30 d after discharge has the potential to enhance health outcomes. Objective The aim of the study was to synthesise the available literature on the effectiveness of nurse-led clinics, during early discharge (up to 30 d), for patients who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention. Review method used A systematic review of randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials was undertaken. Data sources The databases included PubMed, OVID, CINAHL, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, SCOPUS, and ProQuest. Review methods Databases were searched up to November 2018. Two independent reviewers assessed studies using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Results Of 2970 articles screened, only four studies, representing 244 participants, met the review inclusion criteria. Three of these studies had low to moderate risk of bias, with the other study unclear. Interventions comprised physical assessments and individualised education. Reported outcomes included quality of life, medication adherence, cardiac rehabilitation attendance, and psychological symptoms. Statistical pooling was not feasible owing to heterogeneity across interventions, outcome measures, and study reporting. Small improvements in quality of life and some self-management behaviours were reported, but these changes were not sustained over time. Conclusions This review has identified an important gap in the research examining the effectiveness of early postdischarge nurse-led support after percutaneous coronary intervention on outcomes for patients and health services. More robust research with sufficiently powered sample sizes and clearly defined interventions, comparison groups, and outcomes is recommended to determine effectiveness of nurse-led clinics in the early discharge period.

Clinical guidelines recommend that procedural sedation outcomes should be audited. The Tracking and Reporting Outcomes of Procedural Sedation (TROOPS) tool, developed by the International Consortium for the Advancement of Procedural Sedation, is intended to be suitable for use in all locations by sedation providers. We evaluated the feasibility and reliability of using a modified version of the TROOPS tool for sedation that is administered by nurses in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. The version of TROOPS we used contained items in the minor, intermediate, and sentinel categories. Two nurses independently completed the TROOPS tool for 40 patients who underwent a procedure with sedation. A sedation-related adverse event was selected by at least one of the raters for 21 of the patients (52%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.38 to 0.67). Most were minor events related to the airway and breathing category of the TROOPS tool (n = 17; 42%; 95% CI = 0.29 to 0.58). The remaining were intermediate-severity events related to sedation quality. No events for the other categories of the TROOPS tool were selected. The intraclass correlation coefficient between paired nurse ratings of the TROOPS tool was 0.78 (95% CI = 0.43 to 0.92). Most nurses (85%, 95% CI = 73% to 92%) reported that it took less than 1 minute to complete the tool. In summary, paired ratings of sedation-related adverse events by nurses achieved moderate consistency using a modified version of the TROOPS tool containing items from the minor category of the airway and breathing domain. Use of this tool in clinical practice is feasible and reliable.

Aim To develop the Nursing Confidence in Managing Sedation Complications Scale. Design A multi‐phased approach was used. Methods An initial bank of items was created based on the authors' experience and clinical practice guidelines. An expert panel assessed content validity. Exploratory factor analysis was used for item reduction and regression was used to explore construct validity. Responsiveness was evaluated using a pre‐test post‐test design. Results Criteria for content validity was met for 34 items. An 18‐item, three‐factor solution was identified from exploratory factor analysis performed using Nursing Confidence in Managing Sedation Complications Scale scores from 228 nurses. Subscales accounted for 66% of the variance. Cronbach's alpha for the scale (0.95) and subscales was high (>0.85). There were differences (p

Thirst discomfort is common because patients are required to undergo long periods of fasting before medical and surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to examine the validity and reliability of the peri-operative thirst discomfort scale (PTDS) for measuring thirst discomfort before procedures. Fasting patients who were scheduled for an elective cardiac or interventional radiology procedure were included in a prospective observational study. Mokken scaling analysis was used to investigate the dimensionality and hierarchical nature of the PTDS. PTDS scores were compared with fasting duration to evaluate construct validity. Convergent validity was evaluated by comparing the PTDS with global thirst discomfort and thirst intensity ratings. Five items from the peri-operative thirst discomfort scale (PTDS-5) formed a Mokken scale with evidence of invariant item ordering. Participants most easily endorsed the item related to the desire to drink water through to first endorsing symptoms related to dryness of the mouth and lips before those related to the abnormal sensations of “thick” saliva and “thick” tongue. Scale reliability was adequate (rho = 0.84). There was a positive correlation between PTDS-5 scores and the global thirst discomfort rating (tau = 0.54; 95% CI = 0.43 to 0.63), as well as thirst intensity (tau = 0.49; 95% CI = 0.38 to 0.59). Duration of fasting was not associated with PTDS-5 scores. The items in the PTDS-5 form a strong Mokken scale, meaning it is a reliable and precise way to order patients according to their thirst discomfort.

Background A definitive cost analysis of preventing inadvertent perioperative hypothermia (IPH) in surgical patients in Australia is lacking. Preventing IPH is a common nurse-led initiative in surgery and cost savings represent the value of nursing care. Aim The study aims are twofold. First, we aim to estimate the cost of the current prevalence of IPH in Australian hospitals. Second, is to estimate the potential cost reductions that could be realised by reducing IPH prevalence by using a thermal care bundle. Methods Cost-of-illness analysis measures the economic burden of illness to society. It does so by identifying and measuring all costs of a disease or illness such as IPH. It was undertaken using a prevalence approach and a one-year time horizon. Findings The annual costs of IPH to the Australian health system can be estimated to be $1,259,725,856. The annual net benefit of IPH prevention to the Australian health system is $602 million. Using a thermal care bundle to reduce IPH by actively warming 80% of the patients that are not warmed yet could save $657.1 million per year at the expense of $18.4 million. Discussion Preventing IPH using active warming is estimated to lead to significant cost savings across the Australian health system. It is recommended that a national policy for preventing IPH is needed and guidelines must reflect up-to-date strategies for preventing IPH including active prewarming. Conclusion The Thermal Care Bundle should be adopted to lower IPH incidence and associated costs in Australia.

The purpose of this review is to provide a summary of the recent literature addressing the aims, content, outcomes and quality metrics for presedation evaluation. There is a trend towards multidisciplinary development of minimum standards for sedation practice, including presedation assessment. A risk-based paradigm underpins presedation assessment. Improved and validated risk scores are required, especially to predict airway difficulty. There is an increasing focus on skillsets rather than roles. Clinicians should explain the intended depth of sedation, how that may be experienced by patients and how patient preferences for sedation can be incorporated into decision-making. High-quality presedation evaluation will improve the value of sedation care by aligning appropriate resources (including sedation provider), based on patient risk, and also by improving communication and decision-making.

Capnography monitoring is recommended for use during procedural sedation. This study examined associations between capnography waveform abnormalities and the onset of apnea. Capnography waveforms from a sample of 102 participants undergoing moderate procedural sedation with bolus doses of midazolam and fentanyl were analyzed using a mixed effects Cox model. Patients were at increased risk of apnea (classified as end-tidal carbon dioxide concentration of zero) while demonstrating a capnography waveform abnormality classified as hypopnea (more than 10% increase or decrease from baseline end-tidal carbon dioxide concentration) (Hazard Ratio 2.14; 95% CI 1.75 to 2.62). Risk of apnea was not increased during capnography waveform abnormalities classified as bradypnea (capnography-derived respiratory rate less than 8 breaths/min) (Hazard Ratio 0.64; 95% CI 0.33 to 1.25). These estimates were similar when apneic episodes were defined as only those that lasted more than 20 s duration. Deciphering which capnography waveform abnormalities should promote intervention (and therefore alarms to signal the event to clinicians) from those that do not is an essential step towards successful implementation of this technology into practice. Our results indicate that using information about the history of previous capnography waveform abnormalities may be a promising solution to assist prediction of apneic episodes.

Background Active warming reduces risk of surgical complications. Implementation of a perioperative thermal care bundle increased use of active warming for surgical patients. Objective This study aimed to determine if implementing a thermal care bundle to prevent inadvertent perioperative hypothermia is cost-effective. Design A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis was undertaken using Monte Carlo simulations from input distributions to estimate costs and effects. Setting Hospitals undertaking between 5,000 and 40,000 surgeries per year, which either implemented or did not implement the thermal care bundle, were modelled. Participants The decision tree guiding the structure of the model was populated with clinical outcomes (surgical site infection, blood transfusion requirement and morbid cardiac events) of a hypothetical cohort of surgical patients. Interventions Implementation or non-implementation of the thermal care bundle. Main outcome measures Net monetary benefit was calculated by multiplying the health benefits (quality-adjusted life years) by the willingness-to-pay threshold minus the cost. We tested a range of values for willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life year thresholds and plotted results for expected incremental benefits and probability of cost-effectiveness. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was also calculated. Results Thermal care bundle implementation simultaneously reduced costs and increased quality-adjusted life years in the majority of simulations (88.1%). The average cost reduction was $689,659 (95% credible intervals spanned from a $2,718,364 decrease in costs to $379,826 increase in costs) and average difference in quality-adjusted life years was 54 (95% CI = 0.4 less to 176 more). This equated to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $12747 saved per quality-adjusted life year gained. Conclusions It is likely that increasing use of active warming by implementing the thermal care bundle would generate cost-savings and improve the quality of life for surgical patients. It would be good value for hospitals with similar characteristics to those included in our model to allocate the extra resources required for implementation.

Shortened versions of self-reported questionnaires may be used to reduce respondent burden. When shortened screening tools are used, it is desirable to maintain equivalent diagnostic accuracy to full-length forms. This manuscript presents a case study that illustrates how external data and individual participant data meta-analysis can be used to assess the equivalence in diagnostic accuracy between a shortened and full-length form. This case study compares the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and a 4-item shortened version (PHQ-Dep-4) that was previously developed using optimal test assembly methods. Using a large database of 75 primary studies (34,698 participants, 3,392 major depression cases), we evaluated whether the PHQ-Dep-4 cutoff of ≥ 4 maintained equivalent diagnostic accuracy to a PHQ-9 cutoff of ≥ 10. Using this external validation dataset, a PHQ-Dep-4 cutoff of ≥ 4 maximized the sum of sensitivity and specificity, with a sensitivity of 0.88 (95% CI 0.81, 0.93), 0.68 (95% CI 0.56, 0.78), and 0.80 (95% CI 0.73, 0.85) for the semi-structured, fully structured, and MINI reference standard categories, respectively, and a specificity of 0.79 (95% CI 0.74, 0.83), 0.85 (95% CI 0.78, 0.90), and 0.83 (95% CI 0.80, 0.86) for the semi-structured, fully structured, and MINI reference standard categories, respectively. While equivalence with a PHQ-9 cutoff of ≥ 10 was not established, we found the sensitivity of the PHQ-Dep-4 to be non-inferior to that of the PHQ-9, and the specificity of the PHQ-Dep-4 to be marginally smaller than the PHQ-9.

Background Midazolam is used for sedation before diagnostic and therapeutic medical procedures by several routes including oral, intravenous, intranasal and intramuscular. This is an update of a Cochrane review published in 2016, which aimed to determine the evidence on the effectiveness of midazolam for sedation when administered before a diagnostic or therapeutic procedure in adults and children. Methods We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and two trials registers up to May 2020 together with reference checking to identify additional studies. We imposed no language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials of midazolam in comparison with placebo or other medications used for sedation were included. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias for each included study. Results Eight new trials were included in this update, which resulted in changed conclusions for the intravenous midazolam versus placebo, oral midazolam versus chloral hydrate and oral midazolam versus placebo comparisons. Effect estimates for all outcomes within the intravenous midazolam versus placebo (7 trials; 633 adults and 32 children) are uncertain due to concerns about imprecision and risk of bias. Midazolam resulted in a higher level of sedation than placebo (mean difference (MD) 1.05; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.69 to 1.41; 1 study; 100 adults). There was no difference in anxiety (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.99; I2 = 75%; 2 studies; 123 adults). Risk of difficulty performing procedures was lower in the midazolam group (RR 0.5; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.86; I2 = 45%; 3 studies; 191 adults and 32 children). There was no difference in discomfort (RR 0.51; 95% CI 0.25 to 1.04; I2 = 0%; 2 studies; 190 adults). Five trials with 336 children were included in the oral midazolam versus chloral hydrate comparison. Midazolam was less likely to result in moderate sedation (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.82; I2 = 64%; 2 studies, 228 participants). This effect estimate is highly uncertain due to concerns about the risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency. There was no difference in ratings of anxiety (SMD − 0.26; 95% CI − 0.75 to 0.23; I2 = 0%; 2 studies; 68 participants). Midazolam increased risk of incomplete procedures (RR 4.01; 95% CI 1.92 to 8.40; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 268 participants). This effect estimate is uncertain due to concerns about the risk of bias. There were four trials with 359 adults and 77 children included in the oral midazolam versus placebo comparison. Midazolam reduced ratings of anxiety (SMD − 1.01; 95% CI − 1.86 to − 0.16; I2 = 92%; 4 studies; 436 participants). It is unclear if midazolam has an effect on difficulty performing procedures. Meta-analysis was not performed because there was only one incomplete procedure in the midazolam group in one of the trials. Midazolam reduced pain in one study with 99 adults (MD − 2; 95% CI − 2.5 to − 1.6; moderate quality). The effect estimate is uncertain due to concerns about the risk of bias. Conclusion The additional evidence arising from inclusion of new studies in this updated review has not produced sufficient high-quality evidence to determine whether midazolam produces more effective sedation than other medications or placebo in any specific population included in this review. For adults, there was low-quality evidence that intravenous midazolam did not reduce the risk of anxiety or discomfort/pain in comparison to placebo, but the sedation level was higher. By combining results from adults and children, there was low-quality evidence of a large reduction in the risk of procedures being difficult to perform with midazolam in comparison to placebo. The effect estimates for this comparison are uncertain because there was concern about risk of bias and imprecision. There is moderate-quality evidence suggesting that oral midazolam produces less-effective sedation than chloral hydrate for completion of procedures for children undergoing non-invasive diagnostic procedures. Ratings of anxiety were not different between oral midazolam and chloral hydrate. The extent to which giving oral midazolam to adults or children decreases anxiety during procedures compared with placebo is uncertain due to concerns about risk of bias and imprecision. There was moderate-quality evidence from one study that oral midazolam reduced the severity of discomfort/pain for adults during a brief diagnostic procedure in comparison with placebo.

Background High flow nasal oxygen may better support the vulnerable respiratory state of patients during procedural sedation. Objective The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of high flow nasal oxygen in comparison to facemask oxygen on ventilation during cardiac implantable electronic device procedures performed with procedural sedation. Design A randomised controlled trial. Setting The study was conducted at one academic hospital in Canada. Participants Adults undergoing elective cardiac implantable electronic device procedures with sedation administered by an anaesthesia assistant, supervised by an anaesthesiologist from August 2019 to March 2020. Interventions Participants were randomised 1 : 1 to facemask (≥ 8 l min-1) or high flow nasal oxygen (50 l min-1 and a 50 : 50 oxygen to air ratio). Main outcome measures The primary outcome was peak transcutaneous carbon dioxide. Outcomes were analysed using Bayesian statistics. Results The 129 participants who were randomised and received sedation were included. The difference in peak transcutaneous carbon dioxide was 0.0 kPa (95% CI -0.17 to 0.18). Minor adverse sedation events were 6.4 times more likely to occur in the high flow nasal oxygen group. This estimate is imprecise (95% CI 1.34 to 42.99). The odds ratio for oxygen desaturation for the high flow nasal oxygen group compared with the facemask group was 1.2 (95% CI 0.37 to 3.75). The difference in satisfaction with sedation scores between groups was 0.0 (95% CI -0.33 to 0.23). Conclusions Ventilation, as measured by TcCO2, is highly unlikely to differ by a clinically important amount between high flow nasal oxygen at 50 l min-1 or facemask oxygen at 8 l min-1. Further research with a larger sample size would be required to determine the optimal oxygen:air ratio when using high flow nasal oxygen during cardiac implantable electronic device procedures performed with sedation. Trial registration number NCT03858257.

Objective To summarize the evidence regarding the accuracy of continuous non-invasive arterial pressure measurements in adult critical care patients. Research methodology Medline, EMBASE, and CINAHL were searched for studies that included adult critical care patients reporting the agreement between continuous non-invasive and invasive arterial pressure measurements. The studies were selected and assessed for risk of bias using the Revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool by two independent reviewers. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach was used. Pooled estimates of the mean bias and limits of agreement with outer 95% confidence intervals (termed population limits of agreement) were calculated. Results Population limits of agreement for systolic blood pressure were wide, spanning from −36.13 mmHg to 28.28 mmHg (18 studies; 785 participants). Accuracy of diastolic blood pressure measurements was highly inconsistent across studies, resulting in imprecise estimates for the population limits of agreement. Population limits of agreement for mean arterial pressure spanned from −39.96 mmHg to 44.36 mmHg (17 studies; 765 participants). The evidence was rated as very low-quality due to very serious concerns about heterogeneity and imprecision. Conclusion Substantial differences in blood pressure were identified between measurements taken from continuous non-invasive and invasive monitoring devices. Clinicians should consider this broad range of uncertainty if using these devices to inform clinical decision-making in critical care.

Introduction: Three previous individual participant data meta-analyses (IPDMAs) reported that, compared to the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM (SCID), alternative reference standards, primarily the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), tended to misclassify major depression status, when controlling for depression symptom severity. However, there was an important lack of precision in the results. Objective: To compare the odds of the major depression classification based on the SCID, CIDI, and MINI. Methods: We included and standardized data from 3 IPDMA databases. For each IPDMA, separately, we fitted binomial generalized linear mixed models to compare the adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of major depression classification, controlling for symptom severity and characteristics of participants, and the interaction between interview and symptom severity. Next, we synthesized results using a DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analysis. Results: In total, 69,405 participants (7,574 [11%] with major depression) from 212 studies were included. Controlling for symptom severity and participant characteristics, the MINI (74 studies; 25,749 participants) classified major depression more often than the SCID (108 studies; 21,953 participants; aOR 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11–1.92]). Classification odds for the CIDI (30 studies; 21,703 participants) and the SCID did not differ overall (aOR 1.19; 95% CI 0.79–1.75); however, as screening scores increased, the aOR increased less for the CIDI than the SCID (interaction aOR 0.64; 95% CI 0.52–0.80). Conclusions: Compared to the SCID, the MINI classified major depression more often. The odds of the depression classification with the CIDI increased less as symptom levels increased. Interpretation of research that uses diagnostic interviews to classify depression should consider the interview characteristics.

Importance The Patient Health Questionnaire depression module (PHQ-9) is a 9-item self-administered instrument used for detecting depression and assessing severity of depression. The Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) consists of the first 2 items of the PHQ-9 (which assess the frequency of depressed mood and anhedonia) and can be used as a first step to identify patients for evaluation with the full PHQ-9. Objective To estimate PHQ-2 accuracy alone and combined with the PHQ-9 for detecting major depression. Data sources MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, and Web of Science (January 2000-May 2018). Study selection Eligible data sets compared PHQ-2 scores with major depression diagnoses from a validated diagnostic interview. Data extraction and synthesis Individual participant data were synthesized with bivariate random-effects meta-analysis to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity of the PHQ-2 alone among studies using semistructured, fully structured, or Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) diagnostic interviews separately and in combination with the PHQ-9 vs the PHQ-9 alone for studies that used semistructured interviews. The PHQ-2 score ranges from 0 to 6, and the PHQ-9 score ranges from 0 to 27. Results Individual participant data were obtained from 100 of 136 eligible studies (44 318 participants; 4572 with major depression [10%]; mean [SD] age, 49 [17] years; 59% female). Among studies that used semistructured interviews, PHQ-2 sensitivity and specificity (95% CI) were 0.91 (0.88-0.94) and 0.67 (0.64-0.71) for cutoff scores of 2 or greater and 0.72 (0.67-0.77) and 0.85 (0.83-0.87) for cutoff scores of 3 or greater. Sensitivity was significantly greater for semistructured vs fully structured interviews. Specificity was not significantly different across the types of interviews. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.88 (0.86-0.89) for semistructured interviews, 0.82 (0.81-0.84) for fully structured interviews, and 0.87 (0.85-0.88) for the MINI. There were no significant subgroup differences. For semistructured interviews, sensitivity for PHQ-2 scores of 2 or greater followed by PHQ-9 scores of 10 or greater (0.82 [0.76-0.86]) was not significantly different than PHQ-9 scores of 10 or greater alone (0.86 [0.80-0.90]); specificity for the combination was significantly but minimally higher (0.87 [0.84-0.89] vs 0.85 [0.82-0.87]). The area under the curve was 0.90 (0.89-0.91). The combination was estimated to reduce the number of participants needing to complete the full PHQ-9 by 57% (56%-58%). Conclusions and relevance In an individual participant data meta-analysis of studies that compared PHQ scores with major depression diagnoses, the combination of PHQ-2 (with cutoff ≥2) followed by PHQ-9 (with cutoff ≥10) had similar sensitivity but higher specificity compared with PHQ-9 cutoff scores of 10 or greater alone. Further research is needed to understand the clinical and research value of this combined approach to screening.

Background: Effective coordination and integration of care between health care providers is critical to manage complex, chronic medical conditions. Aim: Describe the advanced practice profile and activities of nurse navigators who provide a service for patients with chronic health conditions. Design: An observational study was conducted in four health services, in Queensland, Australia. Methods: In part one, nurse navigators completed a survey incorporating the Advanced Practice Role Delineation tool. In part two, nurse navigators completed a work activity diary, capturing the time spent performing daily activities, modes of communication and referral sources. Findings: Twenty-three and 18 nurse navigators participated in the survey and diary, respectively. Participants were experienced nurses, working full-time. Participants reported spending a great extent of time performing direct comprehensive care, support of systems and education in surveys. The diaries captured a mean of 20 working days per participant, a total of 5,748 work activities. including care of 615 patients. The majority of nurse navigator activities were performed within the direct comprehensive care domain. Communication predominantly occurred with patients, families, hospital health professionals either in person, at a healthcare facility or via phone. Discussion: Our research identified three focus areas of nurse navigator activities: direct comprehensive care, support of systems and education. Further work is required to extend the nurse navigators’ unique contribution to research and publication and professional leadership. Conclusions: This study established baseline knowledge regarding advanced practice profiles and work activities of nurse navigators, which can be utilised to improve current processes and future enhancement of the role.

BackgroundTranscutaneous carbon dioxide (TcCO2) monitoring is a non-invasive alternative to arterial blood sampling. The aim of this review was to determine the accuracy and precision of TcCO2 measurements.MethodsMedline and EMBASE (2000–2016) were searched for studies that reported on a measurement of PaCO2 that coincided with a measurement of TcCO2. Study selection and quality assessment (using the revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (QUADAS-2)) were performed independently. The Grading Quality of Evidence and Strength of Recommendation approach was used to summarise the strength of the body of evidence. Pooled estimates of the mean bias between TcCO2 and PaCO2 and limits of agreement with outer 95% CIs (termed population limits of agreement) were calculated.ResultsThe mean bias was −0.1 mm Hg and the population limits of agreement were −15 to 15 mm Hg for 7021 paired measurements taken from 2817 participants in 73 studies, which was outside of the clinically acceptable range (7.5 mm Hg). The lowest PaCO2 reported in the studies was 18 mm Hg and the highest was 103 mm Hg. The major sources of inconsistency were sensor location and temperature. The population limits of agreement were within the clinically acceptable range across 3974 paired measurements from 1786 participants in 44 studies that applied the sensor to the earlobe using the TOSCA and Sentec devices (−6 to 6 mm Hg).ConclusionThere are substantial differences between TcCO2 and PaCO2 depending on the context in which this technology is used. TcCO2 sensors should preferentially be applied to the earlobe and users should consider setting the temperature of the sensor higher than 42°C when monitoring at other sites.Systematic review registration numberPROSPERO; CRD42017057450.

Background Capnography is commonly used for nurse-administered procedural sedation. Distinguishing between capnography waveform abnormalities that signal the need for clinical intervention for an event and those that do not indicate the need for intervention is essential for the successful implementation of this technology into practice. It is possible that capnography alarm management may be improved by using machine learning to create a “smart alarm” that can alert clinicians to apneic events that are predicted to be prolonged. Objective To determine the accuracy of machine learning models for predicting at the 15-second time point if apnea will be prolonged (ie, apnea that persists for >30 seconds). Methods A secondary analysis of an observational study was conducted. We selected several candidate models to evaluate, including a random forest model, generalized linear model (logistic regression), least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression, ridge regression, and the XGBoost model. Out-of-sample accuracy of the models was calculated using 10-fold cross-validation. The net benefit decision analytic measure was used to assist with deciding whether using the models in practice would lead to better outcomes on average than using the current default capnography alarm management strategies. The default strategies are the aggressive approach, in which an alarm is triggered after brief periods of apnea (typically 15 seconds) and the conservative approach, in which an alarm is triggered for only prolonged periods of apnea (typically >30 seconds). Results A total of 384 apneic events longer than 15 seconds were observed in 61 of the 102 patients (59.8%) who participated in the observational study. Nearly half of the apneic events (180/384, 46.9%) were prolonged. The random forest model performed the best in terms of discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.66) and calibration. The net benefit associated with the random forest model exceeded that associated with the aggressive strategy but was lower than that associated with the conservative strategy. Conclusions Decision curve analysis indicated that using a random forest model would lead to a better outcome for capnography alarm management than using an aggressive strategy in which alarms are triggered after 15 seconds of apnea. The model would not be superior to the conservative strategy in which alarms are only triggered after 30 seconds.

Background: The association between the quality of evidence in systematic reviews and authors' conclusions regarding the effectiveness of interventions relevant to anaesthesia has not been examined. Objective: The objectives of this study were: to determine the proportion of systematic reviews in which the authors made a conclusive statement about the effect of an intervention; to describe the quality of evidence derived from outcomes in reviews that used the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group system for grading the quality of evidence; and to identify review characteristics associated with conclusiveness. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of Cochrane systematic reviews from the Anaesthesia, Critical Care and Emergency Review Group was undertaken. Data sources: The Cochrane webpage was used to identify reviews for inclusion ( http://.ace.cochrane.org/- opens in a new window). Eligibility criteria: New and updated versions of systematic reviews published up to 17 September 2015 were eligible. Protocols for systematic reviews were excluded. Results: A total of 159 reviews were included. GRADE was used in 103 reviews (65%). Of these, high-level evidence for the primary outcome was identified in 11 reviews (10%). The main reasons that quality of evidence for the primary outcome was downgraded were risk of bias (n = 44; 43%) and imprecision (n = 36; 35%). Authors of 47% (n = 75) of the total number of reviews made conclusive statements about the effects of interventions. Independent predictors of conclusiveness in the subgroup of reviews with GRADE assessments were quality of evidence for the primary outcome (odds ratio 2.03; 95% confidence interval: [1.18 to 3.52] and an increasing number of studies included in reviews (OR 1.05; 95% CI: [1.01 to 1.09]). Conclusion: It was common for conclusive statements to be made about the effects of interventions despite evidence for the primary outcome being rated less than high quality. Improving methodological quality of trials would have the greatest impact on improving the quality of evidence.

ObjectiveForced air warming (FAW) during general anaesthesia is a safe and effective intervention used to reduce hypothermia. The objective of this study was to determine if FAW reduces hypothermia when used for procedures performed with sedation in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory.MethodsA parallel-group randomised controlled trial was conducted. Adults receiving sedation in a cardiac catheterisation laboratory at two sites were randomised to receive FAW or usual care, which involved passive warming with heated cotton blankets. Hypothermia, defined as a temperature less than 36°C measured with a sublingual digital thermometer after procedures, was the primary outcome. Other outcomes were postprocedure temperature, shivering, thermal comfort and major complications.ResultsA total of 140 participants were randomised. Fewer participants who received FAW were hypothermic (39/70, 56% vs 48/69, 70%, difference 14%; adjusted RR 0.75, 95% CI=0.60 to 0.94), and body temperature was 0.3°C higher (95% CI=0.1 to 0.5, p=0.004). FAW increased thermal comfort (63/70, 90% vs51/69, 74% difference 16%, RR 1.21, 95% CI=1.04 to 1.42). The incidence of shivering was similar (3/69, 4% vs 0/71 0%, difference 4%, 95% CI=−1.1 to 9.8). One patient in the control group required reintervention for bleeding. No other major complications occurred.ConclusionFAW reduced hypothermia and improved thermal comfort. The difference in temperature between groups was modest and less than that observed in previous studies where use of FAW decreased risk of surgical complications. Therefore, it should not be considered clinically significant.Trial registration numberACTRN12616000013460.

While there are limited data on error in interventional radiology (IR), the literature so far indicates that many errors in IR are potentially preventable. Yet, understanding the sources for error and implementing effective countermeasures can be challenging. Traditional methods for reducing error such as increased vigilance and new policies may be effective but can also contribute to an “error cycle.” A hierarchy of effectiveness for patient safety interventions is outlined, and the characteristics of “high-reliability” organizations in other “high-risk” industries are examined for clues that could be implemented in IR. The evidence behind team error reduction strategies such as checklists is considered along with individual approaches such as “slowing down when you should.” However, error in medicine is inevitable, and this article also seeks to outline an evidence-based approach to managing the psychological impact of being involved in medical error as a physician.

Identifying common patterns in capnography waveform abnormalities and the factors that influence these patterns could yield insights to optimize responses to sedation-induced respiratory depression. Respiratory state sequences for 102 patients who had a procedure in a cardiac catheterisation laboratory with procedural sedation and analgesia were developed by classifying each second of procedures into a state of normal breathing or other capnography waveform abnormalities based on pre-specified cut-offs for respiratory rate and end-tidal CO2 concentration. Hierarchical clustering identified four common patterns in respiratory state sequences, which were characterized by a predominance of the state assigned normal breathing (n = 42; 41%), hypopneic hypoventilation (n = 38; 38%), apnea (n = 15; 15%) and bradypneic hypoventilation (n = 7; 7%). A multivariable distance matrix regression model including demographic and clinical variables explained 28% of the variation in inter-individual differences in respiratory state sequences. Obstructive sleep apnea (R2 = 2.4%; p = 0.02), smoking status (R2 = 2.8%; p = 0.01), Charlson comorbidity index score (R2 = 2.5%; p = 0.021), peak transcutaneous carbon dioxide concentration (R2 = 4.1%; p = 0.002) and receiving an intervention to support respiration (R2 = 5.6%; p = 0.001) were significant covariates but each explained only small amounts of the variation in respiratory state sequences. Oxygen desaturation (SpO2

Aim: To determine whether applying forced air warming attenuates the impact of sedation-induced impairment of thermoregulation on body temperature of patients who are sedated during interventional procedures in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. Background: A moderate proportion of sedated patients who undergo procedures in the cardiac catheterization laboratory with only passive warming become hypothermic. Hypothermia in the surgical population is associated with increased risk of adverse cardiac events, infections, thrombotic and haemorrhagic complications and prolonged hospital stay. For this reason, investigation of the clinical benefits of preventing hypothermia in sedated patients using active warming is required. Design: Randomized controlled trial. Methods: A total of 140 participants undergoing elective interventional procedures with sedation in a cardiac catheterization laboratory will be recruited from two hospitals in Australia. Participants will be randomized to receive forced air warming (active warming) or usual care (passive warming with heated cotton blankets) throughout procedures. The primary outcome is hypothermia (defined as temperature less than 36°C) at the conclusion of the procedure. Secondary outcomes are postprocedure temperature, postprocedural shivering, thermal discomfort, major complications, disability-free survival to 30 days postprocedure, cost-effectiveness and feasibility of conducting a larger clinical trial. Discussion. The results from this study will provide high-level evidence for practice in an area where there is currently no guidance. Findings will be easily translatable into clinical practice because most hospitals already have forced air warming equipment available for use during general anaesthesia. Registration number: ACTRN12616000013460.

Purpose To examine the effects that the sedative and analgesic medications commonly used in the cardiac catheterization laboratory have on thermoregulation. Design A structured review strategy was used. Methods MEDLINE and CINAHL were searched for published studies, and reference lists of retrieved studies were scrutinized for further studies. Data were extracted using a standardized extraction tool. Findings A total of nine studies examined the effect that sedative and analgesic medications have on thermoregulation. Midazolam has minimal impact on thermoregulation, whereas opioids, dexmedetomidine, and propofol markedly decrease vasoconstriction and shivering thresholds. Conclusions Patients who receive sedation in the cardiac catheterization laboratory may be at risk of hypothermia because of the use of medications that impair thermoregulation. Further research is required to identify the prevalence of unplanned hypothermia during sedation in the cardiac catheterization laboratory.

We would like to thank Smith and colleagues for their critique1 of our analysis of the quality of evidence reported in systematic reviews published by the Cochrane Anaesthesia, Critical Care and Emergency medicine review group.2 The cut-off date was simply when data collection commenced for this study. It is true that a higher proportion of reviews would have used GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) if a more up to date sample was used for our analysis. However, a substantial number of reviews in the sample we analysed did use GRADE...

We included six trials with 2524 participants. Capnography reduced hypoxaemic episodes, relative risk (95% CI) 0.71 (0.56-0.91), p = 0.02, but the quality of evidence was poor due to high risks of performance bias and detection bias and substantial statistical heterogeneity. The reduction in hypoxaemic episodes was statistically homogeneous in the subgroup of three trials of 1823 adults sedated for colonoscopy, relative risk (95% CI) 0.59 (0.48-0.73), p < 0.001, although the risks of performance and detection biases were high. There was no evidence that capnography affected other outcomes, including assisted ventilation, relative risk (95% CI) 0.58 (0.26-1.27), p = 0.17.

Aim To determine the cost-effectiveness of forced air warming during sedation in a cardiac catheterisation laboratory. Background Forced air warming improves thermal comfort in comparison with standard care. It is not known whether the extra costs required for forced air warming are good value. Design Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomised controlled trial conducted in 2016-2017. Methods A cost-effectiveness analysis was undertaken using Monte Carlo simulations from input distributions to estimate costs and effects associated with using forced air warming to reduce risk of thermal discomfort for patients receiving sedation in a cardiac catheterisation laboratory. A range of willingness to pay threshold values were tested with results plotted on a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve. Costs were calculated in Australian currency ($AUD). Results Estimated total costs were $5.21 (SD 3.26) higher per patient for forced air warming in comparison to standard care. Estimated probability of success (rating of thermal comfort) was 0.16 (0.06) higher for forced air warming. Forced air warming becomes more likely to result in a net benefit than standard care at a willingness to pay threshold of $34. Conclusion Forced air warming could be considered cost-effective for procedures performed with sedation in a cardiac catheterisation laboratory if the extra cost of an incremental gain in thermal comfort is less than the decision maker’s willingness to pay for it. Therefore, those responsible for decision-making regarding use of forced air warming in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory can use results of our model to decide if it represents good value for their organisation.

This systematic review examined the effectiveness of nurse care coordinator (CC) roles on patient-reported and health service outcomes. Multiple electronic databases (Medline, CINAHL, and EMBASE) were searched and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was applied by two independent reviewers. The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was used to assess the quality of evidence. A total of 45 articles (reporting on 36 studies) were included. The majority of studies ( n = 28, 78%) were conducted in the United States and published after 2009 ( n = 24, 67%). Thirteen studies (36%) used a randomized controlled trial design. A total of 17 studies evaluated patient-reported outcomes and 29 studies reported health service outcomes. The individual components of nurse CC roles that were evaluated ranged considerably. The impact of nurse care coordination on patient-reported and health service outcomes was inconsistent. There was an indication from higher quality studies that nurse care coordination roles were more likely to result in improved patient and health service outcomes where they involved frequent, in-person interactions, had ongoing follow-up with monitoring of disease status, and involved transition care and the application of behavior change principles.

Commentary on: Saxon C, Fulbrook P, Fong KM, et al. High-risk respiratory patients’ experiences of bronchoscopy with conscious sedation and analgesia: a qualitative study . J Clin Nurs 2017. Implications for practice and research - Nurses should inform patients that the administration of sedation does not guarantee lack of recall and should interact with patients throughout the procedure in an effort to decrease the risk of distress during times of awareness. - The highest priority for further research is to elucidate the effectiveness of tailoring how information about procedures is presented to patients.

Background Knowledge of current trends in nurse-administered procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory (CCL) may provide important insights into how to improve safety and effectiveness of this practice. Objective To characterise current practice as well as education and competency standards regarding nurse-administered PSA in Australian and New Zealand CCLs. Design A quantitative, cross-sectional, descriptive survey design was used. Methods Data were collected using a web-based questionnaire on practice, educational standards and protocols related to nurse-administered PSA. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse data. Results A sample of 62 nurses, each from a different CCL, completed a questionnaire that focused on PSA practice. Over half of the estimated total number of CCLs in Australia and New Zealand was represented. Nurse-administered PSA was used in 94% ( n =58) of respondents CCLs. All respondents indicated that benzodiazepines, opioids or a combination of both is used for PSA ( n =58). One respondent indicated that propofol was also used. 20% ( n =12) indicated that deep sedation is purposefully induced for defibrillation threshold testing and cardioversion without a second medical practitioner present. Sedation monitoring practices vary considerably between institutions. 31% ( n =18) indicated that comprehensive education about PSA is provided. 45% ( n =26) indicated that nurses who administer PSA should undergo competency assessment. Conclusion By characterising nurse-administered PSA in Australian and New Zealand CCLs, a baseline for future studies has been established. Areas of particular importance to improve include protocols for patient monitoring and comprehensive PSA education for CCL nurses in Australia and New Zealand.

We carried out a critical appraisal and synthesis of the systematic reviews and meta-analyses of remote monitoring for heart failure. A comprehensive literature search identified 65 relevant publications from 3333 citations. Seventeen studies fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Seven (41%) systematic reviews pooled results for meta-analysis. Eight (47%) considered all non-invasive remote monitoring strategies. Five (29%) focused on telemonitoring. Four (24%) included both non-invasive and invasive technologies. The reviews were appraised by two independent reviewers for their quality and risk of bias using the AMSTAR tool. According to the AMSTAR criteria, ten (58%) systematic reviews were of poor methodological quality. In the high quality reviews, the relative risk of mortality in patients who received remote monitoring ranged from 0.53 to 0.88. The high quality reviews also reported that remote monitoring reduced the relative risk of all-cause (0.52 to 0.96) and heart failure-related hospitalizations (0.72 to 0.79) and, as a consequence, healthcare costs. However, further research is required before considering widespread implementation of remote monitoring. The subset of the heart failure population that derives the most benefit from intensive monitoring, the best technology, and the optimum duration of monitoring, all need to be identified. © The Author(s) 2013.

Background The International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation recommended in 2006 that intervention studies to maximize psychological outcomes after transplantation should be conducted. Potentially, studies reporting on the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions in improving psychological outcomes for heart transplant recipients may have been published since the call for this research. Thus, further evidence may currently be available to inform policy and practice decision-making regarding the implementation of such interventions. Accordingly, an evaluation of the evidence is required. Objectives The objective of this review was to identify the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions on psychological outcomes for heart transplant recipients.

Aims and objectives To explore issues and challenges associated with nurse-administered procedural sedation and analgesia in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory from the perspectives of senior nurses. Background Nurses play an important part in managing sedation because the prescription is usually given verbally directly from the cardiologist who is performing the procedure and typically, an anaesthetist is not present. Design A qualitative exploratory design was employed. Methods Semi-structured interviews with 23 nurses from 16 cardiac catheterisation laboratories across four states in Australia and also New Zealand were conducted. Data analysis followed the guide developed by Braun and Clark to identify the main themes. Results Major themes emerged from analysis regarding the lack of access to anaesthetists, the limitations of sedative medications, the barriers to effective patient monitoring and the impact that the increasing complexity of procedures has on patients' sedation requirements. Conclusions The most critical issue identified in this study is that current guidelines, which are meant to apply regardless of the clinical setting, are not practical for the cardiac catheterisation laboratory due to a lack of access to anaesthetists. Furthermore, this study has demonstrated that nurses hold concerns about the legitimacy of their practice in situations when they are required to perform tasks outside of clinical practice guidelines. To address nurses' concerns, it is proposed that new guidelines could be developed, which address the unique circumstances in which sedation is used in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory. Relevance to clinical practice Nurses need to possess advanced knowledge and skills in monitoring for the adverse effects of sedation. Several challenges impact on nurses' ability to monitor patients during procedural sedation and analgesia. Preprocedural patient education about what to expect from sedation is essential.

Characterizing how physical and psychological symptoms interact in heart transplant recipients may lead to advances in therapeutic options. This study examined associations between pain and major depression. Method: A cross-sectional study was conducted with adult heart transplant recipients. Pain was measured with the bodily pain domain of the Short Form-36 Health Survey and psychological distress with the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K-10). The Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview, version 6.0, was used to identify participants meeting the criteria for major depression. Hierarchical linear regression was used to determine if there was an association between pain and major depression, controlling for pharmacological treatment of depression, severity of psychological distress, and clinical characteristics including immunosuppression medication which may induce pain as a side effect. Results: Average pain score of the 48 heart transplant recipients was 43 ( SD ± 10, range 0–100, lower scores indicate worse pain), with moderate pain reported by 39% ( n = 19). Major depression was associated with worse pain ( R2 change = 36%, β = −16, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [−30, −4], p = .012). Pharmacological treatment for depression was associated with better pain scores ( R2 change = 1.5%, β = 13, 95% CI [4, 23], p = .006). Conclusions: Heart transplant recipients with major depression had worse pain after controlling for pharmacological treatment of depression, severity of psychological distress, and clinical characteristics. Thus, it is imperative that clinicians devising a treatment regimen for pain in heart transplant recipients take into account co-occurring depression and vice versa.

BACKGROUND: Midazolam is used for sedation before diagnostic and therapeutic medical procedures. It is an imidazole benzodiazepine that has depressant effects on the central nervous system (CNS) with rapid onset of action and few adverse effects. The drug can be administered by several routes including oral, intravenous, intranasal and intramuscular. OBJECTIVES: To determine the evidence on the effectiveness of midazolam for sedation when administered before a procedure (diagnostic or therapeutic). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL to January 2016), MEDLINE in Ovid (1966 to January 2016) and Ovid EMBASE (1980 to January 2016). We imposed no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials in which midazolam, administered to participants of any age, by any route, at any dose or any time before any procedure (apart from dental procedures), was compared with placebo or other medications including sedatives and analgesics. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors extracted data and assessed risk of bias for each included study. We performed a separate analysis for each different drug comparison. MAIN RESULTS: We included 30 trials (2319 participants) of midazolam for gastrointestinal endoscopy (16 trials), bronchoscopy (3), diagnostic imaging (5), cardioversion (1), minor plastic surgery (1), lumbar puncture (1), suturing (2) and Kirschner wire removal (1). Comparisons were: intravenous diazepam (14), placebo (5) etomidate (1) fentanyl (1), flunitrazepam (1) and propofol (1); oral chloral hydrate (4), diazepam (2), diazepam and clonidine (1); ketamine (1) and placebo (3); and intranasal placebo (2). There was a high risk of bias due to inadequate reporting about randomization (75% of trials). Effect estimates were imprecise due to small sample sizes. None of the trials reported on allergic or anaphylactoid reactions. Intravenous midazolam versus diazepam (14 trials; 1069 participants) There was no difference in anxiety (risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39 to 1.62; 175 participants; 2 trials) or discomfort/pain (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.49; 415 participants; 5 trials; I² = 67%). Midazolam produced greater anterograde amnesia (RR 0.45; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.66; 587 participants; 9 trials; low‐quality evidence). Intravenous midazolam versus placebo (5 trials; 493 participants) One trial reported that fewer participants who received midazolam were anxious (3/47 versus 15/35; low‐quality evidence). There was no difference in discomfort/pain identified in a further trial (3/85 in midazolam group; 4/82 in placebo group; P = 0.876; very low‐quality evidence). Oral midazolam versus chloral hydrate (4 trials; 268 participants) Midazolam increased the risk of incomplete procedures (RR 4.01; 95% CI 1.92 to 8.40; moderate‐quality evidence). Oral midazolam versus placebo (3 trials; 176 participants) Midazolam reduced pain (midazolam mean 2.56 (standard deviation (SD) 0.49); placebo mean 4.62 (SD 1.49); P < 0.005) and anxiety (midazolam mean 1.52 (SD 0.3); placebo mean 3.97 (SD 0.44); P < 0.0001) in one trial with 99 participants. Two other trials did not find a difference in numerical rating of anxiety (mean 1.7 (SD 2.4) for 20 participants randomized to midazolam; mean 2.6 (SD 2.9) for 22 participants randomized to placebo; P = 0.216; mean Spielberger's Trait Anxiety Inventory score 47.56 (SD 11.68) in the midazolam group; mean 52.78 (SD 9.61) in placebo group; P > 0.05). Intranasal midazolam versus placebo (2 trials; 149 participants) Midazolam induced sedation (midazolam mean 3.15 (SD 0.36); placebo mean 2.56 (SD 0.64); P < 0.001) and reduced the numerical rating of anxiety in one trial with 54 participants (midazolam mean 17.3 (SD 18.58); placebo mean 49.3 (SD 29.46); P < 0.001). There was no difference in meta‐analysis of results from both trials for risk of incomplete procedures (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.12; downgraded to low‐quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no high‐quality evidence to determine if midazolam, when administered as the sole sedative agent prior to a procedure, produces more or less effective sedation than placebo or other medications. There is low‐quality evidence that intravenous midazolam reduced anxiety when compared with placebo. There is inconsistent evidence that oral midazolam decreased anxiety during procedures compared with placebo. Intranasal midazolam did not reduce the risk of incomplete procedures, although anxiolysis and sedation were observed. There is moderate‐quality evidence suggesting that oral midazolam produces less effective sedation than chloral hydrate for completion of procedures for children undergoing non‐invasive diagnostic procedures.

Objectives To identify and appraise the literature concerning nurse-administered procedural sedation and analgesia in the cardiac catheter laboratory. Design and data sources An integrative review method was chosen for this study. MEDLINE and CINAHL databases as well as The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Joanna Briggs Institute were searched. Nineteen research articles and three clinical guidelines were identified. Results The authors of each study reported nurse-administered sedation in the CCL is safe due to the low incidence of complications. However, a higher percentage of deeply sedated patients were reported to experience complications than moderately sedated patients. To confound this issue, one clinical guideline permits deep sedation without an anaesthetist present, while others recommend against it. All clinical guidelines recommend nurses are educated about sedation concepts. Other findings focus on pain and discomfort and the cost-savings of nurse-administered sedation, which are associated with forgoing anaesthetic services. Conclusions Practice is varied due to limitations in the evidence and inconsistent clinical practice guidelines. Therefore, recommendations for research and practice have been made. Research topics include determining how and in which circumstances capnography can be used in the CCL, discerning the economic impact of sedation-related complications and developing a set of objectives for nursing education about sedation. For practice, if deep sedation is administered without an anaesthetist present, it is essential nurses are adequately trained and have access to vital equipment such as capnography to monitor ventilation because deeply sedated patients are more likely to experience complications related to sedation. These initiatives will go some way to ensuring patients receiving nurse-administered procedural sedation and analgesia for a procedure in the cardiac catheter laboratory are cared for using consistent, safe and evidence-based practices.

Research has consistently described that patients after cardiac surgery experience disturbed sleep yet there has been limited investigation into methods to improve this experience. Complementary therapies may be a method of addressing this issue. Aim: To determine if using progressive muscle relaxation improves self-rated sleep quality for patients following cardiac surgery. Methods and Results: Thirty-five participants’ quantitative data on sleep quality were obtained via questionnaire during their first postoperative week after cardiac surgery. Qualitative data were obtained through written responses to open-ended questions. No significant differences in sleep quality scores were found between pre and post-intervention of progressive muscle relaxation using the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test. However, the qualitative analysis discovered the intervention aided some participants in initiating their sleep by diversion of thought, inducing relaxation or alleviating pain and anxiety. Conclusions: Qualitative findings suggest that progressive muscle relaxation may help patients who have undergone cardiac surgery initiate their sleep.

Objectives Processed electroencephalogram-based depth of anaesthesia monitoring devices provide an additional method to monitor level of consciousness during procedural sedation and analgesia. The objective of this systematic review was to determine whether using a depth of anaesthesia monitoring device improves the safety and efficacy of sedation. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Electronic databases (CENTRAL; Medline; CINAHL) were searched up to May 2015. Review methods Randomised controlled trials that compared use of a depth of anaesthesia monitoring device to a control group who received standard monitoring during procedural sedation and analgesia were included. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment (Cochrane risk of bias tool) were performed by two reviewers. Safety outcomes were hypoxaemia, hypotension and adverse events. Efficacy outcomes were amount of sedation used, duration of sedation recovery and rate of incomplete procedures. Results A total of 16 trials (2138 participants) were included. Evidence ratings were downgraded to either low or moderate quality due to study limitations and imprecision. Meta-analysis of 8 trials (766 participants) found no difference in hypoxaemia (RR 0.87; 95% CI=0.67–1.12). No statistically significant difference in hypotension was observed in meta-analysis of 8 trials (RR 0.96; 95% CI=0.54–1.7; 942 participants). Mean dose of propofol was 51mg lower for participants randomised to depth of anaesthesia monitoring (95% CI=−88.7 to −13.3mg) in meta-analysis of results from four trials conducted with 434 participants who underwent interventional endoscopy procedures with propofol infusions to maintain sedation. The difference in recovery time between depth of anaesthesia and standard monitoring groups was not clinically significant (standardised mean difference −0.41; 95% CI=−0.8 to −0.02; I 2 =86%; 8 trials; 809 participants). Conclusions Depth of anaesthesia monitoring did impact sedation titration during interventional procedures with propofol infusions. For this reason, it seems reasonable for anaesthetists to utilise a depth of anaesthesia monitoring device for select populations of patients if it is decided that limiting the amount of sedation would be beneficial for the individual patient. However, there is no need to invest in purchasing extra equipment or training staff who are not familiar with this technology (e.g. nurses who do not routinely use a depth of anaesthesia monitoring device during general anaesthesia) because there is no high quality evidence suggestive of clear clinical benefits for patient safety or sedation efficacy.

Aim and objectives To identify the prevalence that temperature reduced by more than 1 °C from pre- to post-procedure in a sample of non-anaesthetised patients undergoing procedures in a cardiac catheterisation laboratory. Background Advances in medical technology are minimising the invasiveness of diagnostic tests and treatments for disease, which is correspondingly increasing the number of medical procedures performed without sedation or anaesthesia. Procedural areas in which medical procedures are performed without anaesthesia are typically kept at a cool temperature for staff comfort. As such, there is a need to inform nursing practices with regard to the thermal management of non-anaesthetised patients undergoing procedures in surgical or procedural environments. Design Single-site observational study. Methods Patients were included if they had undergone an elective procedure without sedation or anaesthesia in a cardiac catheterisation laboratory. Ambient room temperature was maintained between 18 and 20 °C. Passive warming with heated cotton blankets was applied. Nurses measured body temperature and thermal comfort before and after 342 procedures. Results Mean change in temperature was −0.08 °C (Standard deviation 0.43). The reduction in temperature was more than 1 °C after 11 procedures (3.2%). One patient whose temperature had reduced more than 1 °C after their procedure reported thermal discomfort. A total of 12 patients were observed to be shivering post-procedure (3.6%). No demographic or clinical characteristics were associated with reduction in temperature of more than 1 °C from pre to post-procedure. Conclusions Significant reduction in body temperature was rare in our sample of non-anaesthetised patients. Relevance to clinical practice Similar results would likely be found in other procedural contexts during procedures conducted in settings with comparable room temperatures where passive warming can also be applied with limited skin exposure.

Background Anxiety and depression are common after heart transplantation. This study aimed to pilot test the feasibility of a clinical model of psychological care for heart transplant recipients. The model of care involved nurse-led screening for anxiety and depression followed by referral for a course of telephone-delivered cognitive behaviour therapy as well as co-ordination of communication with on-going specialist and primary care services. Methods A pilot randomised controlled trial was conducted. Heart transplant recipients who self-reported at least mild anxiety or depressive symptoms were randomised (defined as a score higher than 5 on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 or the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 [GAD-7], or a score higher than 20 on the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale [K10]). The primary outcome was assessment of feasibility of conducting a larger trial, which included identification of recruitment and attrition rates as well as the acceptability of the intervention. Follow-up was conducted at 9 weeks and 6 months. Results One hundred twenty-two of the 126 (97 %) heart transplant recipients assessed on their attendance at the outpatient clinic met the study eligibility criteria. Of these patients, 88 (72 %) agreed to participate. A moderate proportion of participants (n = 20; 23 %) reported at least mild symptoms of anxiety or depression. Five participants were excluded because they were currently receiving psychological counselling, two withdrew before randomisation and the remaining 13 were randomised (seven to intervention and six to usual care). The majority of the randomised participants were male (n = 9; 69 %) and aged over 60 (range 35–73). Median length of time post-transplant was 9.5 years (ranging from 1 to 19 years). On enrolment, 3 randomised participants were taking anti-depressants. One intervention group participant withdrew and a further 3 (50 %) declined the telephone-delivered CBT sessions; all because of restrictions associated with physical illnesses. Attrition was 30 % at the 6 month follow-up time-point. Conclusions Due to the poor acceptability of telephone-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy observed in our sample, changes to intervention components are indicated and further pilot testing is required. Trial registration ACTRN12613000740796 Date registered: 03/07/2013. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12912-016-0183-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background An important potential clinical benefit of using capnography monitoring during procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) is that this technology could improve patient safety by reducing serious sedation-related adverse events, such as death or permanent neurological disability, which are caused by inadequate oxygenation. The hypothesis is that earlier identification of respiratory depression using capnography leads to a change in clinical management that prevents hypoxaemia. As inadequate oxygenation/ventilation is the most common reason for injury associated with PSA, reducing episodes of hypoxaemia would indicate that using capnography would be safer than relying on standard monitoring alone. Methods/design The primary objective of this review is to determine whether using capnography during PSA in the hospital setting improves patient safety by reducing the risk of hypoxaemia (defined as an arterial partial pressure of oxygen below 60 mmHg or percentage of haemoglobin that is saturated with oxygen [SpO2] less than 90 %). A secondary objective of this review is to determine whether changes in the clinical management of sedated patients are the mediating factor for any observed impact of capnography monitoring on the rate of hypoxaemia. The potential adverse effect of capnography monitoring that will be examined in this review is the rate of inadequate sedation. Electronic databases will be searched for parallel, crossover and cluster randomised controlled trials comparing the use of capnography with standard monitoring alone during PSA that is administered in the hospital setting. Studies that included patients who received general or regional anaesthesia will be excluded from the review. Non-randomised studies will be excluded. Screening, study selection and data extraction will be performed by two reviewers. The Cochrane risk of bias tool will be used to assign a judgment about the degree of risk. Meta-analyses will be performed if suitable. Discussion This review will synthesise the evidence on an important potential clinical benefit of capnography monitoring during PSA within hospital settings. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42015023740 Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13643-015-0085-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

To identify the prevalence of and risk factors for inadvertent hypothermia after procedures performed with procedural sedation and analgesia in a cardiac catheterization laboratory.A single-center, prospective observational study.A tertiary-care private hospital in Australia.399 patients undergoing elective procedures with procedural sedation and analgesia were included. Propofol infusions were used when an anesthesiologist was present. Otherwise, bolus doses of either midazolam or fentanyl or a combination of these medications was used.NoneHypothermia was defined as a temperature36.0°C. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify risk factors. Hypothermia was present after 23.3% (n = 93; 95% confidence interval [CI] 19.2%-27.4%) of 399 procedures. Sedative regimens with the highest prevalence of hypothermia were any regimen that included propofol (n = 35; 40.2%; 95% CI 29.9%-50.5%) and the use of fentanyl combined with midazolam (n = 23; 20.3%; 95% CI 12.9%-27.7%). Difference in mean temperature from pre-procedure to post-procedure was -0.27°C (standard deviation 0.45). Receiving propofol (odds ratio [OR] 4.6 95% CI 2.5-8.6), percutaneous coronary intervention (OR 3.2; 95% CI 1.7-5.9), body mass index25 (OR 2.5; 95% CI 1.4-4.4) and being hypothermic prior to the procedure (OR 4.9; 95% CI 2.3-10.8) were independent predictors of post-procedural hypothermia.A moderate prevalence of hypothermia was observed. The small absolute change in temperature observed may not be a clinically important amount. More research is needed to increase confidence in the authors' estimates of hypothermia in sedated patients and its impact on clinical outcomes.

Background and Aim: Hospitalisation for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is typically brief. The onset of psychological distress is common between the period from hospital discharge until cardiologist review and or commencement of cardiac rehabilitation. Contributing factors to psychological distress for this population are insufficient education and deficiencies in self-management skills. The aim of this review was to synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of nurse-led clinics delivered in the early discharge period (up to 30 days) after PCI on patient-related and health service-related outcomes. Method: A systematic review was undertaken following PRISMA guidelines. Searches of PubMed, OVID, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), SCOPUS, ProQuest theses and dissertations databases were conducted to find published and unpublished randomised, controlled trials. Two independent reviewers appraised the included studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Results: A total 2,600 titles and abstracts were screened. Three studies met inclusion criteria, with 182 participants included. Participant recruitment and retention rates in these studies indicated that operation of nurse-led clinics in the early postprocedure period was feasible. Sample sizes were small, resulting in imprecise estimates of the effect of nurse-led clinics on all outcomes, including anxiety and depression. Conclusion: Larger randomised trials are needed to address the deficiencies in the evidence base for psychological and self-management interventions in the early postdischarge period after PCI to improve patient and health service outcomes.

Background Patient safety is a priority in dentistry. Evaluating the benefits and harms associated with the addition of capnography to standard monitoring during moderate sedation for adult patients in the dental practice setting is needed. Types of Studies Reviewed The authors used rapid review methodology to identify relevant systematic reviews, which they updated through a systematic search by using the same search strategy as the identified reviews. The authors searched PubMed and Google Scholar and through the references of the identified systematic reviews, which yielded 2,892 studies. Inclusion criteria were that the article was available in English, was original research in adult humans who had undergone moderate procedural sedation, and involved comparing standard monitoring with the addition of capnography. Results Sixteen studies were eligible, involving 3,866 adults undergoing procedural sedation. The authors used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to evaluate the evidence and rate it as being of moderate to low quality because of high risk of bias and heterogeneous effects for the outcomes of hypoxemia and adverse respiratory events. Capnography had higher sensitivity to detect adverse respiratory events than did standard monitoring alone (0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.65 to 0.99) and may reduce the risk of developing hypoxemia by 31% (risk ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.57 to 0.82). Capnography did not affect the risk of developing serious adverse events, procedure time, sedation quality, or patient satisfaction. Conclusions and Practical Implications Adding capnography to standard monitoring of adults during moderate sedation may reduce the risk of developing hypoxemia, increase detection of adverse respiratory events, and is not associated with additional harms. These findings suggest routine use of capnography during moderate sedation has the potential to reduce adverse anesthetic outcomes in dental practice.

Background: Trials of new technologies to remotely monitor for signs and symptoms of worsening heart failure are continually emerging. The extent to which technological differences impact the effectiveness of noninvasive remote monitoring for heart failure management is unknown. This study examined the effect of specific technology used for noninvasive remote monitoring of people with heart failure on all-cause mortality and heart failure-related hospitalizations. Materials and Methods: A subanalysis of a large systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. Studies were stratified according to the specific type of technology used, and separate meta-analyses were performed. Four different types of noninvasive remote monitoring technologies were identified, including structured telephone calls, videophone, interactive voice response devices, and telemonitoring. Results: Only structured telephone calls and telemonitoring were effective in reducing the risk of all-cause mortality (relative risk [RR]=0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-1.01; p=0.06; and RR=0.62; 95% CI, 0.50-0.77; p

Background: Post-heart transplant psychological distress may directly hinder physiological health as well as indirectly impact on clinical outcomes by increasing unhealthy behaviors, such as immunosuppression non-adherence. Reducing psychological distress for heart transplant recipients is therefore vitally important in order to improve not only patients’ overall health and well-being but also clinical outcomes, such as morbidity and mortality. Evidence from other populations suggests that non-pharmacological interventions may be an effective strategy. Aim: The purpose of this study was to appraise the efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions on psychological outcomes after heart transplant. Method: A systematic review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. Experimental and quasi-experimental studies that involved any non-pharmacological intervention for heart transplant recipients were included, provided that data on psychological outcomes were reported. Multiple electronic databases were searched for published and unpublished studies and reference lists of retrieved studies were scrutinized for further primary research. Data were extracted using a standardized data extraction tool. Included studies were assessed by two independent reviewers using standardized critical appraisal instruments. Results: Three studies fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria, which involved only 125 heart transplant recipients. Two studies reported on exercise programs. One study reported a web-based psychosocial intervention. While psychological outcomes significantly improved from baseline to follow-up for the recipients who received the interventions, between-group comparisons were not reported. The methodological quality of the studies was judged to be poor. Conclusions: Further research is required, as we found there is insufficient evidence available to draw conclusions for or against the use of non-pharmacological interventions after heart transplant.

Aim To develop clinical practice guidelines for nurse-administered procedural sedation and analgesia in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory. Background Numerous studies have reported that nurse-administered procedural sedation and analgesia is safe. However, the broad scope of existing guidelines for the administration and monitoring of patients who receive sedation during medical procedures without an anaesthetist presents means there is a lack of specific guidance regarding optimal nursing practices for the unique circumstances in which nurse-administered procedural sedation and analgesia is used in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory. Methods A sequential mixed methods design was utilised. Initial recommendations were produced from three studies conducted by the authors: an integrative review; a qualitative study; and a cross-sectional survey. The recommendations were revised in accordance with responses from a modified Delphi study. The first Delphi round was completed by nine senior cardiac catheterisation laboratory nurses. All but one of the draft recommendations met the pre-determined cut-off point for inclusion. There were a total of 59 responses to the second round. Consensus was reached on all recommendations. Implications for nursing The guidelines that were derived from the Delphi study offer twenty four recommendations within six domains of nursing practice: Pre-procedural assessment; Pre-procedural patient and family education; Pre-procedural patient comfort; Intra-procedural patient comfort; Intra-procedural patient assessment and monitoring; and Post-procedural patient assessment and monitoring. Conclusion These guidelines provide an important foundation towards the delivery of safe, consistent and evidence-based nursing care for the many patients who receive sedation in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory setting.

There are few data regarding the effectiveness of remote monitoring for older people with heart failure. We conducted a post-hoc sub-analysis of a previously published large Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis of relevant randomized controlled trials to determine whether structured telephone support and telemonitoring were effective in this population.A post hoc sub-analysis of a systematic review and meta-analysis that applied the Cochrane methodology was conducted. Meta-analyses of all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalizations and heart failure-related hospitalizations were performed for studies where the mean or median age of participants was 70 or more years.The mean or median age of participants was 70 or more years in eight of the 16 (n=2659/5613; 47%) structured telephone support studies and four of the 11 (n=894/2710; 33%) telemonitoring studies. Structured telephone support (RR 0.80; 95% CI=0.63-1.00) and telemonitoring (RR 0.56; 95% CI=0.41-0.76) interventions reduced mortality. Structured telephone support interventions reduced heart failure-related hospitalizations (RR 0.81; 95% CI=0.67-0.99).Despite a systematic bias towards recruitment of individuals younger than the epidemiological average into the randomized controlled trials, older people with heart failure did benefit from structured telephone support and telemonitoring. These post-hoc sub-analysis results were similar to overall effects observed in the main meta-analysis. While further research is required to confirm these observational findings, the evidence at hand indicates that discrimination by age alone may be not be appropriate when inviting participation in a remote monitoring service for heart failure.

The traditional hospital-based model of cardiac rehabilitation faces substantial challenges, such as cost and accessibility. These challenges have led to the development of alternative models of cardiac rehabilitation in recent years. The aim of this study was to identify and critique evidence for the effectiveness of these alternative models. A total of 22 databases were searched to identify quantitative studies or systematic reviews of quantitative studies regarding the effectiveness of alternative models of cardiac rehabilitation. Included studies were appraised using a Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool and the National Health and Medical Research Council's designations for Level of Evidence. The 83 included articles described interventions in the following broad categories of alternative models of care: multifactorial individualized telehealth, internet based, telehealth focused on exercise, telehealth focused on recovery, community- or home-based, and complementary therapies. Multifactorial individualized telehealth and community- or home-based cardiac rehabilitation are effective alternative models of cardiac rehabilitation, as they have produced similar reductions in cardiovascular disease risk factors compared with hospital-based programmes. While further research is required to address the paucity of data available regarding the effectiveness of alternative models of cardiac rehabilitation in rural, remote, and culturally and linguistically diverse populations, our review indicates there is no need to rely on hospital-based strategies alone to deliver effective cardiac rehabilitation. Local healthcare systems should strive to integrate alternative models of cardiac rehabilitation, such as brief telehealth interventions tailored to individual's risk factor profiles as well as community- or home-based programmes, in order to ensure there are choices available for patients that best fit their needs, risk factor profile, and preferences.