malnutrition
Conditions
Interventions
The educational intervention based on clinical simulation was built following the Guideline for Reporting Evidence based practice Educational interventions and teaching (GREET). To guide the construct
2. Enteral feeding tube insertion technique
3. Monitoring of diet administration in the patient and 4. Control of complications. The instruments were applied by two members of the research team, and the order of the questions
Other
M01.526.485.067.652
N02.421.143.130.320
Sponsors
Universidade Estadual de Campinas
Irmandade Nossa Senhora das Mercês da Santa Casa de Montes Claros
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: Care nurses from units that treat adult patients on enteral nutritional therapy.
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: Distance nursing, vacation or medical leave; admitted during the study process initiated.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| The primary endpoint was that nurses exposed to an educational intervention would present better results in the evaluation of the knowledge about the use of enteral nutritional therapy (indication of enteral nutritional therapy, insertion technique of enteral feeding, monitoring of diet administration and control of intercurrences) in relation to the baseline. ;The answers obtained from CENFTNE were recoded into two categories: 1 - Right and 2 - I have doubt and wrong. Data distribution was assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk test. For comparisons between the two pre and post-test periods with respect to the instrument domain scores, the paired Student's t test or the Wilcoxon test were applied. according to the distribution of data. For comparisons with respect to the items, we used the McNemar test. For comparison tests, effect size measurements were calculated for an unpaired Student's t-test and for an Anova model, as proposed by Cohen (1992). Multiple linear regression models were also constructed using generalized linear models (Gill, 2001), considering the scores obtained as dependent variables. For all tests, the significance level adopted was 5%.;In the analysis of the use of clinical simulation to acquire knowledge about ENT, when comparing the pre and post-test periods in relation to the CENFTNE scores, a statistically significant difference was observed after the intervention application for all instrument domains. The final score verified by the application of the instrument was higher in all domains and the difference between times was from 2.1 (Domain 3) to 3.7 (Domain 1). For the total CENFTNE score, the difference between the times was 11.9 points. In assessing the effect size, this was of great magnitude for all domains, as well as for the total instrument score, with the p-value obtained by paired Student's t-test and paired Wilcoxon's test.;And in the analysis of multiple linear regression models considering the scores obtained from domains 1-4 and t | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| The secondary outcome of this study is the validation of the CENFTNE instrument by judges and nurses' assistance and the evaluation of clinical simulation scenarios.;During the conduction of scenarios 1 and 2, there was full agreement between the evaluators for all checklist items to verify the actions performed by the five nurses who participated as volunteers of the scenarios. Clinically relevant activities (ie physical clinical tools, social interactions, and structured interventions) were present. In addition, all study participants, regardless of role assignments or commitment goals, participate in a combination of these activities. For the scenario of “indication of enteral nutritional therapy and feeding tube insertion technique”, the checklist used contained 29 items and the number of actions performed as correct ranged from 14 to 21. For the scenario of “monitoring the administration of enteral diet and control of complications ”, of the 14 items in the checklist, the total number of hits ranged from 4 to 12 items. Regarding nurses' perceptions during debriefing, all evaluated the contribution of the simulation strategy to learning as positive. The nurses who did not work in the scenarios emphasized that watching the others allowed them to rethink their clinical reasoning process. When asked what they would do differently, the statements revolved around four points: indication of diet; probe insertion technique; diet monitoring and reduction of tube obstruction; and what to do about complications such as diarrhea, nausea and vomiting. | — |
Countries
Brazil
Contacts
Public ContactViviane Carrasco
Unimontes
Outcome results
None listed