An Evaluation of a Continuing Education Program for Family Caregivers of Ventilator-Dependent Children with Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA)
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results
3.1. Transcription and Familiarization
3.2. Coding: Creating an Analytical Framework
3.3. Interpreting the Data
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Sterni, L.M.; Carroll, J.L. Caring for the Ventilator Dependent Child: A Clinical Guide; Sterni, L.M., Carroll, J.L., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Kun, S.S.; Edwards, J.D.; Ward, S.L.; Keens, T.G. Hospital readmissions for newly discharged pediatric home mechanical ventilation patients. Pediatr. Pulmonol. 2012, 47, 409–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gregoretti, C.; Ottonello, G.; Testa, M. Survival of patients with spinal muscular atrophy type 1. Pediatrics 2017, 26, 2012–2278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Boroughs, D.S.; Dougherty, J.A. Decreasing accidental mortality of ventilator-dependent children at home: A call to action. Home Healthc. Nurse 2012, 30, 103–111. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Weibell, C.J. Principles of Learning: 7 Principles to Guide Personalized, Student-Centered Learning in the Technology-Enhanced, Blended Learning Environment. 2011. Available online: https://principlesoflearning.wordpress.com (accessed on 30 March 2017).
- Ward, D.J.; Furber, C.; Tierney, S. Using Framework Analysis in nursing research: A worked example. J. Adv. Nurs. 2013, 69, 2423–2431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Client | Caregiver | Ventilation | SIM Lab Date | 3-Month Survey Date | 6-Month Survey Date | Client Age | SMA Type |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
O.H. | C.M. | BiPAP | 9 April 2015 | 9 July 2015 | 9 October 2015 | 5 years | 2 |
K.C. | D.C. | Trach/Vent | 16 April 2015 | 16 July 2015 | 16 October 2015 | 6 years | 1 |
M.S. | T.F. | BiPAP | 20 April 2015 | 20 July 2015 | 20 October 2015 | 6 years | 2 |
T.B. | K.B. | Trach/Vent | 12 March 2015 | 12 June 2015 | 12 September 2015 | 1.5 years | 1 |
T.M. | B & T.M. | Trach/Vent | 20 March 2015 | 20 June 2015 | 20 September 2015 | 4 years | 2 |
A.R. | M.R. | Trach/Vent | 24 April 2015 | 24 July 2015 | 24 October 2015 | 6 months | 1 |
J.A. | T.P. | BiPAP | 15 April 2015 | 15 July 2015 | 15 October 2015 | 7 years | 2 |
J.F. | A.F. | BiPAP | 7 April 2015 | 7 July 2015 | 7 October 2015 | 16 years | 1 |
M.F. | L & L.F. | BiPAP | 3 April 2015 | 3 July 2015 | 3 October 2015 | 18 years | 1 |
J.R. | C.R. | Trach/Vent | 18 March 2015 | 18 June 2015 | 18 September 2015 | 4 years | 1 |
J.C. | D.R. | BiPAP | 27 April 2105 | 27 July 2015 | 27 October 2015 | 6 years | 1 |
Non-Invasive Mechanical Ventilation (BiPAP) Scenarios | Mechanical Ventilation Via Tracheostomy Scenarios |
---|---|
Agitation of child while on BiPAP | Decannulation with inability to re-establish airway |
Respiratory distress while on BiPAP | Ventilator malfunction |
Power outage response | Respiratory distress response |
CPR for the child on BiPAP * | Power outage response |
CPR for the child with a tracheostomy |
Results | All but one caregiver improved pretest scores on post-tests. |
All caregivers reported that they received new information. | |
All caregivers reported satisfaction or high satisfaction with the training techniques. | |
All caregivers reported that the nurse simulation educators were knowledgeable. | |
All caregivers reported increased confidence in care giving as a result of the training. | |
All caregivers reported feeling better prepared to recognize and handle emergencies as a result of the training. | |
All caregivers reported that the emergency training would be valuable to caregivers of children with other complex medical needs that require mechanical ventilation at home. | |
All caregivers evaluated by clinical nurse managers in their homes at the child’s bedside were determined to be proficient in caregiver skills and techniques for their children. | |
Recommendations for future training | Create identical checklists for both nurses and family caregivers to follow step-by-step during training. |
Have a member of the training team assume responsibility for reviewing the videos and report the differences between planned-to-do and real-world to-do to the team. |
“[My son] developed a respiratory infection that rapidly progressed. I was having difficulty clearing his airway and keeping his oxygen saturation within his normal limits. I immediately thought about the training I received in the sim lab. I remained calm and began the stepwise approach to assessment of his condition I had learned in the simulation lab. I recognized that he was heading rapidly from respiratory distress toward respiratory arrest. I called 911 and the children’s hospital. The children’s hospital airlifted my son by helicopter directly to the hospital. By the time we reached the hospital by car, my son was in the operating room having a tracheostomy tube placed. He is now receiving mechanical ventilation with a tracheostomy and a ventilator. He has been in the hospital for more than two months while we receive new caregiver training for invasive ventilation and while he recovers. The sim lab training led to my accurate recognition of a dire emergency and I was able to respond calmly and effectively which saved his life. We look forward to future training in the BAYADA sim lab to reinforce and refresh the skills we are learning now in the hospital. I believe all parents who have children with complex respiratory needs should be offered the emergency training we received. It isn’t until an emergency occurs that you realize how important it is to respond quickly and effectively.” |
“The training is awesome and is important for all parents of children like mine.” |
“In the future, if my child receives new orders or a new piece of equipment, I would like to receive additional training.” |
“After the training, [my child] could no longer be adequately supported by BiPAP. He received a tracheostomy and is now supported by [invasive] mechanical ventilation. I will want new emergency preparedness training in the near future.” |
“At first the training was nerve-wracking. The simulation educator soon put me at ease, and I was able to learn new information. My confidence in caring for my child was boosted by the training.” |
“I am a seasoned caregiver, but the practice was great and I’m glad to know that I will be able to recognize and handle a respiratory emergency.” |
“The training was very, very helpful.” |
“I feel like I can better anticipate emergencies.” |
© 2017 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Boroughs, D.S. An Evaluation of a Continuing Education Program for Family Caregivers of Ventilator-Dependent Children with Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA). Children 2017, 4, 33. https://doi.org/10.3390/children4050033
Boroughs DS. An Evaluation of a Continuing Education Program for Family Caregivers of Ventilator-Dependent Children with Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA). Children. 2017; 4(5):33. https://doi.org/10.3390/children4050033
Chicago/Turabian StyleBoroughs, Deborah S. 2017. "An Evaluation of a Continuing Education Program for Family Caregivers of Ventilator-Dependent Children with Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA)" Children 4, no. 5: 33. https://doi.org/10.3390/children4050033
APA StyleBoroughs, D. S. (2017). An Evaluation of a Continuing Education Program for Family Caregivers of Ventilator-Dependent Children with Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA). Children, 4(5), 33. https://doi.org/10.3390/children4050033