Impact of the Use of Battery-Operated Toothbrushes for Intubated Patients on the Ease and Frequency of Oral Care

2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/157077
Category:
Abstract
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Impact of the Use of Battery-Operated Toothbrushes for Intubated Patients on the Ease and Frequency of Oral Care
Author(s):
Brames, Nancy; Prentice, Donna; Rimmer, Linda; Charles, Mariah; Johns, Cathy
Author Details:
Nancy Brames, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis, MO, USA, email: nebrames@charter.net; Donna Prentice; Linda Rimmer; Mariah Charles; Cathy Johns
Abstract:
PURPOSE: This study looked at the use of battery-operated toothbrushes and whether they are easier to use when performing oral care on intubated patients and if their use increases the frequency of tooth brushing compared with manual toothbrushes. Nurse satisfaction and preference of toothbrush type was also studied. BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that brushing the teeth of intubated patients as part of an oral care protocol has significantly decreased the incidence of Ventilator Associated Pneumonia (VAP) in this patient population. However, the ease of brushing the teeth of a patient with an endotracheal tube may affect the frequency that this task is performed. METHODS: A descriptive study using pre- and post-study surveys was conducted in 3 ICUs. The pre-study survey was completed by 113 RNs; of those, 77 (68%) returned the post-study survey. Both surveys used a Likert-type scale. Battery-operated toothbrushes were given to the ICUs for use with intubated patients after return of the pre-study surveys. The toothbrushes were used for 4 months before completing a post-study survey. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the participant's preferences in toothbrush type and ease of use of the battery-operated toothbrush. The t-test was applied for group comparisons, when appropriate to examine differences between groups. RESULTS: Statistically significant increases in all questions regarding frequency, ease, effectiveness, and satisfaction were noted (alpha = 0.05). The study showed 67.6% of RNs brushed teeth of intubated patients at least once per shift > 60% of the time with a battery-operated toothbrush compared to 48.7% with manual toothbrushes. Battery-operated toothbrushes were rated effective to very effective by 60.8% of RNs compared to 11.5% for manual toothbrushes. RNs were satisfied to very satisfied with the battery-operated toothbrush at 63.5% and 11.4% with the manual. The battery operated toothbrush was rated somewhat to much easier to use by 77% of RNs; 84.1% preferred battery-operated toothbrushes. CONCLUSIONS: RNs found using a battery-operated toothbrush for oral care on intubated patients is easier than with a manual toothbrush. They also felt the battery-operated toothbrush was more effective than the manual. Providing a toothbrush that is easier to use and is viewed as more effective increases the frequency of oral care in intubated patients. Nurse satisfaction is significantly increased with the use of battery-operated toothbrushes.
Repository Posting Date:
26-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
26-Oct-2011
Citation:
2009 National Teaching Institute Research Abstracts. American Journal of Critical Care, 18(3), e1-e17.
Conference Date:
2009
Conference Name:
National Teaching Institute and Critical Care Exposition
Conference Host:
American Association of Critical-Care Nurses
Conference Location:
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
Note:
This is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.type.categoryAbstracten_GB
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleImpact of the Use of Battery-Operated Toothbrushes for Intubated Patients on the Ease and Frequency of Oral Careen_GB
dc.contributor.authorBrames, Nancyen_GB
dc.contributor.authorPrentice, Donnaen_GB
dc.contributor.authorRimmer, Lindaen_GB
dc.contributor.authorCharles, Mariahen_GB
dc.contributor.authorJohns, Cathyen_GB
dc.author.detailsNancy Brames, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis, MO, USA, email: nebrames@charter.net; Donna Prentice; Linda Rimmer; Mariah Charles; Cathy Johnsen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/157077-
dc.description.abstractPURPOSE: This study looked at the use of battery-operated toothbrushes and whether they are easier to use when performing oral care on intubated patients and if their use increases the frequency of tooth brushing compared with manual toothbrushes. Nurse satisfaction and preference of toothbrush type was also studied. BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that brushing the teeth of intubated patients as part of an oral care protocol has significantly decreased the incidence of Ventilator Associated Pneumonia (VAP) in this patient population. However, the ease of brushing the teeth of a patient with an endotracheal tube may affect the frequency that this task is performed. METHODS: A descriptive study using pre- and post-study surveys was conducted in 3 ICUs. The pre-study survey was completed by 113 RNs; of those, 77 (68%) returned the post-study survey. Both surveys used a Likert-type scale. Battery-operated toothbrushes were given to the ICUs for use with intubated patients after return of the pre-study surveys. The toothbrushes were used for 4 months before completing a post-study survey. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the participant's preferences in toothbrush type and ease of use of the battery-operated toothbrush. The t-test was applied for group comparisons, when appropriate to examine differences between groups. RESULTS: Statistically significant increases in all questions regarding frequency, ease, effectiveness, and satisfaction were noted (alpha = 0.05). The study showed 67.6% of RNs brushed teeth of intubated patients at least once per shift > 60% of the time with a battery-operated toothbrush compared to 48.7% with manual toothbrushes. Battery-operated toothbrushes were rated effective to very effective by 60.8% of RNs compared to 11.5% for manual toothbrushes. RNs were satisfied to very satisfied with the battery-operated toothbrush at 63.5% and 11.4% with the manual. The battery operated toothbrush was rated somewhat to much easier to use by 77% of RNs; 84.1% preferred battery-operated toothbrushes. CONCLUSIONS: RNs found using a battery-operated toothbrush for oral care on intubated patients is easier than with a manual toothbrush. They also felt the battery-operated toothbrush was more effective than the manual. Providing a toothbrush that is easier to use and is viewed as more effective increases the frequency of oral care in intubated patients. Nurse satisfaction is significantly increased with the use of battery-operated toothbrushes.en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-26T19:24:03Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-26en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-26T19:24:03Z-
dc.identifier.citation2009 National Teaching Institute Research Abstracts. American Journal of Critical Care, 18(3), e1-e17.en_GB
dc.conference.date2009en_GB
dc.conference.nameNational Teaching Institute and Critical Care Expositionen_GB
dc.conference.hostAmerican Association of Critical-Care Nursesen_GB
dc.conference.locationNew Orleans, Louisiana, USAen_GB
dc.identifier.citation2009 National Teaching Institute Research Abstracts. American Journal of Critical Care, 18(3), e1-e17.en_GB
dc.description.noteThis is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.-
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.