2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/158981
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Nurses' Use of Clean Versus Sterile Technique in the Hospital Setting
Abstract:
Nurses' Use of Clean Versus Sterile Technique in the Hospital Setting
Conference Sponsor:Midwest Nursing Research Society
Conference Year:2007
Author:Reising, Deanna, PhD, APRN-BC
P.I. Institution Name:Indiana University
Contact Address:Sycamore 405, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA
Co-Authors:J.M. Gemender, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN
Objective: The purpose of this survey research was to gain understanding of when nurses choose to use clean technique versus sterile technique in the hospital setting. Background: With growing microbial antibiotic resistance, nosocomial infections continues to be at the forefront of patient care concerns. Despite general 'expert' opinion, primary research has not sufficiently demonstrated which patient care situations require sterile technique versus that of clean technique. While the cost of performing a sterile dressing is not significantly more than performing a clean dressing, cost is consistently cited as a factor in decision-making about sterile versus clean technique. However, there is a lack of research about nurses' decision-making on sterile versus clean technique for types of wounds. Methods: This study used a survey design of participants in acute care 'Magnet-designated' facilities. At the time of data collection, 17 of 130 Magnet facilities chose to participate in the study resulting in 423 participants. Content analysis was used to analyze the survey data. Results: In terms of the frequency with which sterile technique was used over clean technique: 5.2% of participants reported using sterile technique none of the time, 46% reported using sterile technique less than half of the time, 16.1% used sterile technique about half the time, 20.3% used sterile technique more than half the time, and 7.3% used sterile technique all of the time. The most common uses for sterile techniques are: large wounds (100% of the time), burn wounds (84.2%), post-operative wounds (81.5%), thoracic wounds (60%), and tracheostomy related (53.8%). Physician orders dictated the type of dressing change for sterile technique 87.3% of the time, while hospital policy directed the nurse toward sterile technique 58.8% of the time. Conclusions: Although there was some general agreement among nurses in some areas related to sterile versus clean technique use, the practices were varied. Research is still needed in this area to establish best practices.
Repository Posting Date:
26-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
17-Oct-2011
Sponsors:
Midwest Nursing Research Society

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleNurses' Use of Clean Versus Sterile Technique in the Hospital Settingen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/158981-
dc.description.abstract<table><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-title">Nurses' Use of Clean Versus Sterile Technique in the Hospital Setting</td></tr><tr class="item-sponsor"><td class="label">Conference Sponsor:</td><td class="value">Midwest Nursing Research Society</td></tr><tr class="item-year"><td class="label">Conference Year:</td><td class="value">2007</td></tr><tr class="item-author"><td class="label">Author:</td><td class="value">Reising, Deanna, PhD, APRN-BC</td></tr><tr class="item-institute"><td class="label">P.I. Institution Name:</td><td class="value">Indiana University</td></tr><tr class="item-address"><td class="label">Contact Address:</td><td class="value">Sycamore 405, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA</td></tr><tr class="item-email"><td class="label">Email:</td><td class="value">dreising@indiana.edu</td></tr><tr class="item-co-authors"><td class="label">Co-Authors:</td><td class="value">J.M. Gemender, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-abstract">Objective: The purpose of this survey research was to gain understanding of when nurses choose to use clean technique versus sterile technique in the hospital setting. Background: With growing microbial antibiotic resistance, nosocomial infections continues to be at the forefront of patient care concerns. Despite general 'expert' opinion, primary research has not sufficiently demonstrated which patient care situations require sterile technique versus that of clean technique. While the cost of performing a sterile dressing is not significantly more than performing a clean dressing, cost is consistently cited as a factor in decision-making about sterile versus clean technique. However, there is a lack of research about nurses' decision-making on sterile versus clean technique for types of wounds. Methods: This study used a survey design of participants in acute care 'Magnet-designated' facilities. At the time of data collection, 17 of 130 Magnet facilities chose to participate in the study resulting in 423 participants. Content analysis was used to analyze the survey data. Results: In terms of the frequency with which sterile technique was used over clean technique: 5.2% of participants reported using sterile technique none of the time, 46% reported using sterile technique less than half of the time, 16.1% used sterile technique about half the time, 20.3% used sterile technique more than half the time, and 7.3% used sterile technique all of the time. The most common uses for sterile techniques are: large wounds (100% of the time), burn wounds (84.2%), post-operative wounds (81.5%), thoracic wounds (60%), and tracheostomy related (53.8%). Physician orders dictated the type of dressing change for sterile technique 87.3% of the time, while hospital policy directed the nurse toward sterile technique 58.8% of the time. Conclusions: Although there was some general agreement among nurses in some areas related to sterile versus clean technique use, the practices were varied. Research is still needed in this area to establish best practices.</td></tr></table>en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-26T21:35:11Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-17en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-26T21:35:11Z-
dc.description.sponsorshipMidwest Nursing Research Societyen_GB
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.