4.7 Article

Underrecognition and undertreatment of thirst among hospitalized patients with restricted oral feeding and drinking

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-93048-4

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Thirst, a distressing feeling often overlooked by healthcare professionals, is a major source of patient distress among NGT + NBM and NBM patients. The majority of patients in these populations experience thirst, with significant distress associated with it. Active identification and treatment of thirst are suggested to achieve person-centered care.
Thirst is distressing but overlooked by healthcare professionals. Patients experience thirst due to comorbidities, physical or cognitive limitations, and iatrogenesis. Nasogastric tube (NGT) use and nil-by-mouth(NBM) orders are common practices that can lead to thirst. However, thirst in these populations has never been formally studied. We aim to examine prevalence of recognition and treatment of thirst among NGT + NBM and NBM patients. Our descriptive study was conducted intermittently over 25 weeks, across 1.5 years, in 12 adult general medicine wards of a tertiary hospital. Cognitively intact NGT + NBM or NBM inpatients, defined as Abbreviated Mental Test score >= 8, were studied. One-time questionnaire was administered. Variables included: demography, co-morbidities, clinical condition, feeding route, thirst defined by thirst distress and/or intensity >= 3, pain, hunger and volume status. 88 NGT + NBM and NBM patients were studied. 69.3% suffered from thirst. Thirsty patients experienced significant thirst-related distress (mean score +/- SD: 5.7 +/- 2.5). Subjects with previous stroke and who were euvolemic tended towards thirst. 13.6% were asked about thirst by doctors or nurses. Thirst was a major source of patient distress in our study. We suggest that thirst needs to be actively identified and targeted to achieve person-centred care.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据