Assessing knowledge levels of intensive care unit nurses and doctors regarding drug administration via enteral feeding tubes: a survey study.

Ayşe Gül Koçoğlu Kinal, Yunus Emre Ayhan, Aslınur Albayrak
Author Information
  1. Ayşe Gül Koçoğlu Kinal: Intensive Care Unit, Dr. Siyami Ersek Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkiye. ORCID
  2. Yunus Emre Ayhan: Intensive Care Unit, Dr. Siyami Ersek Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkiye. ORCID
  3. Aslınur Albayrak: Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Süleyman Demirel University, Faculty of Pharmacy, Isparta, Turkiye. ORCID

Abstract

Background/aim: Knowledge deficiency regarding appropriate drug administration through enteral feeding tubes (EFTs) is common in intensive care units (ICUs). The aim of this study is to evaluate the knowledge levels of nurses and doctors in ICUs about drug administration via EFTs.
Materials and methods: This study was conducted as a cross-sectional online survey. Survey questions were created using Google Forms and distributed to nurses and doctors in various ICUs across hospitals in İstanbul, Türkiye. The researchers designed the survey questions based on literature reviews and existing examples. The survey consisted of three sections and a total of 25 questions: the first section included seven demographic questions, while the second and third sections focused on participants' knowledge regarding drug administration via EFT and the selection of appropriate dosage forms, respectively.
Results: The online survey form was sent to 400 healthcare workers in ICUs, and 221 (55.2%) completed the survey. Among the participants, 66 (29.9%) were male, and 112 (50.6%) were doctors. There was no significant difference in the mean (± SD) of correct answers to 9 questions on drug administration between doctors (5.4 ± 1.3) and nurses (5.3 ± 1.4) (p = 0.471). In the mean (± SD) of correct answers to 9 questions on dosage form selection, doctors (3.9 ± 2.1) had higher scores than nurses (2.7 ± 1.9) (p < 0.001). The mean (± SD) of the responses given to all questions was found to be higher in doctors (9.4 ± 2.9) than in nurses (8 ± 2.7) (p < 0.001).
Conclusion: In ICUs, the knowledge of nurses and doctors about drug administration and dosage form selection via EFT is at a low to moderate level. Enhancing collaboration among healthcare professionals may be effective in bridging this knowledge gap.

Keywords

References

  1. Crit Care Nurs Q. 2024 Oct-Dec 01;47(4):286-295 [PMID: 39265110]
  2. J Adv Nurs. 2011 Dec;67(12):2586-92 [PMID: 21592191]
  3. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2019 Jul 09;10:493-500 [PMID: 31372085]
  4. Clin Nutr. 2006 Apr;25(2):210-23 [PMID: 16697087]
  5. J Res Pharm Pract. 2017 Apr-Jun;6(2):100-105 [PMID: 28616433]
  6. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2015 Apr;40(2):220-5 [PMID: 25655434]
  7. Aust Crit Care. 2019 May;32(3):218-222 [PMID: 29759596]
  8. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2009 Aug 15;66(16):1458-67 [PMID: 19667002]
  9. Nutr Hosp. 2012 Jul-Aug;27(4):1309-13 [PMID: 23165579]
  10. Nutr Clin Pract. 2005 Jun;20(3):354-62 [PMID: 16207674]
  11. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2021 Mar;45(3):625-632 [PMID: 32384187]
  12. J Intellect Disabil Res. 2016 Nov;60(11):1066-1072 [PMID: 26939804]
  13. Saudi Pharm J. 2021 Feb;29(2):134-142 [PMID: 33679176]
  14. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2007 Sep;5(3):324-53 [PMID: 21631795]
  15. Nurs Crit Care. 2018 May;23(3):141-146 [PMID: 29424127]
  16. J Res Pharm Pract. 2012 Jul;1(1):37-40 [PMID: 24991587]
  17. Am J Nurs. 2009 Oct;109(10):34-42; quiz 43 [PMID: 21753476]
  18. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2016;24: [PMID: 27276019]
  19. Nursing. 2000 Mar;30(3):58-9 [PMID: 11000821]
  20. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2017 Jan;41(1):15-103 [PMID: 27815525]
  21. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2002 Feb 15;59(4):378-9 [PMID: 11885404]
  22. Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther. 2014 Sep-Oct;46(4):307-11 [PMID: 25293484]
  23. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2005 Feb;21(1):5-15 [PMID: 15681212]
  24. Curr Nutr Rep. 2019 Dec;8(4):356-362 [PMID: 31606851]
  25. Pharm World Sci. 2009 Apr;31(2):145-8 [PMID: 19031008]
  26. J Clin Nurs. 2008 Sep;17(17):2257-65 [PMID: 18705702]
  27. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2017 Feb;71(2):164-168 [PMID: 27507069]
  28. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2010 Sep-Oct;18(5):888-94 [PMID: 21120407]
  29. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2009 Mar-Apr;33(2):122-67 [PMID: 19171692]
  30. Int J Clin Pharm. 2016 Feb;38(1):10-5 [PMID: 26464336]
  31. Int J Clin Pharm. 2012 Oct;34(5):757-64 [PMID: 22790463]
  32. Nurse Educ Today. 2014 Feb;34(2):185-90 [PMID: 24219921]
  33. Qual Saf Health Care. 2006 Feb;15(1):44-7 [PMID: 16456209]
  34. Saudi Pharm J. 2024 Feb;32(2):101938 [PMID: 38261870]
  35. Nursing. 2013 Dec;43(12):26-33; quiz 34-5 [PMID: 24165280]

MeSH Term

Humans
Enteral Nutrition
Intensive Care Units
Cross-Sectional Studies
Male
Female
Surveys and Questionnaires
Adult
Clinical Competence
Physicians
Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
Nurses
Turkey

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0±doctorsnursesdrugadministrationsurveyquestions9ICUsknowledgeviadosageform12regardingfeedingintensivecarestudyselectionmeanSD43p0appropriateenteraltubesEFTslevelsonlinesectionsEFThealthcarecorrectanswers5higher7<001unitBackground/aim:KnowledgedeficiencycommonunitsaimevaluateMaterialsmethods:conductedcross-sectionalSurveycreatedusingGoogleFormsdistributedvariousacrosshospitalsİstanbulTürkiyeresearchersdesignedbasedliteraturereviewsexistingexamplesconsistedthreetotal25questions:firstsectionincludedsevendemographicsecondthirdfocusedparticipants'formsrespectivelyResults:sent400workers221552%completedAmongparticipants66299%male112506%significantdifference=471scoresresponsesgivenfound8Conclusion:lowmoderatelevelEnhancingcollaborationamongprofessionalsmayeffectivebridginggapAssessingtubes:Enteraldoctornurse

Similar Articles

Cited By

No available data.