IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v29y2020i11-12p1920-1932.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploration of difficulty accessing the mouths of intubated and mechanically ventilated adults for oral care: A video and photographic elicitation study

Author

Listed:
  • Craig M. Dale
  • Jan E. Angus
  • Susan Sutherland
  • Shelly Dev
  • Louise Rose

Abstract

Aim To explore descriptors of difficulty accessing the mouths of intubated and mechanically ventilated adults for oral care, consequences, modifiable antecedents and recommendations for improving care delivery. Background Nurses report oral access and care delivery difficulty in most mechanically ventilated patients. Design A prospective qualitative descriptive design. Methods Data were collected using video and photographic elicitation interviews focused on delivery of oral care. Directed content analysis was used to explore descriptive categories. Reporting used the SRQR guidelines. Setting and participants A university‐affiliated hospital in Toronto, Canada. Participants included clinicians experienced in accessing the oral space of adults representing nursing, medicine, dentistry and allied health professionals. Findings We recruited 18 participants; 9 representing critical care and 9 other specialties frequently accessing the mouth, that is dentistry. Descriptors for observed difficulty accessing the oral cavity were “oral crowding with tubes” and “aversive patient responses”, which were considered to result in insufficient oral care. Participants perceived aversive patient responses (e.g. biting, turning head side to side, gagging, coughing) as a consequence of forced introduction of instruments inside a crowded mouth. A key finding identified by participants was the observation of substantial procedural pain during oral care interventions. Potentially modifiable antecedents to difficult oral care delivery identified were procedural pain, oral health deterioration (e.g. xerostomia) and lack of interprofessional team problem‐solving. Recommendations to address these antecedents included patient preparation for oral care through verbal and nonverbal cueing, pharmacological and nonpharmacological strategies, and ICU interprofessional education. Conclusions Oral care in mechanically ventilated adults is complex and painful. Visual research methods offer important advantages for oral care exploration including its ability to reveal less visible aspects of the nurse–patient encounter, thereby enabling novel insights and care. Relevance for clinical practice Interprofessional education and training in oral health and care interventions tailored to mechanically ventilated patients are recommended.

Suggested Citation

  • Craig M. Dale & Jan E. Angus & Susan Sutherland & Shelly Dev & Louise Rose, 2020. "Exploration of difficulty accessing the mouths of intubated and mechanically ventilated adults for oral care: A video and photographic elicitation study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(11-12), pages 1920-1932, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:29:y:2020:i:11-12:p:1920-1932
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.15014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15014
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.15014?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David A. Richards & Angelique Hilli & Claire Pentecost & Victoria A. Goodwin & Julia Frost, 2018. "Fundamental nursing care: A systematic review of the evidence on the effect of nursing care interventions for nutrition, elimination, mobility and hygiene," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(11-12), pages 2179-2188, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Annamaria Bagnasco & Milko Zanini & Nicoletta Dasso & Silvia Rossi & Fiona Timmins & Miss Carolina Galanti & Giuseppe Aleo & Gianluca Catania & Loredana Sasso, 2020. "Dignity, privacy, respect and choice—A scoping review of measurement of these concepts within acute healthcare practice," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(11-12), pages 1832-1857, June.
    2. Claire Pentecost & Julia Frost & Holly V. R. Sugg & Angelique Hilli & Victoria A. Goodwin & David A. Richards, 2020. "Patients' and nurses' experiences of fundamental nursing care: A systematic review and qualitative synthesis," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(11-12), pages 1858-1882, June.
    3. Debra Jackson & Olga Kozlowska, 2018. "Fundamental care—the quest for evidence," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(11-12), pages 2177-2178, June.
    4. Lene Odgaard & Lena Aadal & Marianne Eskildsen & Ingrid Poulsen, 2020. "Using clinical quality databases to monitor the quality of fundamental care: Example with weight status after severe traumatic brain injury," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(11-12), pages 2031-2038, June.
    5. Alison Kitson, 2018. "Moving on…," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(11-12), pages 2175-2176, June.
    6. Daniela Lillekroken, 2020. "“A privilege but also a challenge.” Nurse educators' perceptions about teaching fundamental care in a simulated learning environment: A qualitative study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(11-12), pages 2011-2022, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:29:y:2020:i:11-12:p:1920-1932. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.