Clinical decision-making process of healthcare workers when feeding critically ill adults in public sector ICUs in South Africa
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background. Feeding critically ill patients is a complex process because swallowing is heterogeneous, and dysphagia in critically ill patients can have multiple causes. Decisions regarding dysphagia in the critically ill need to be made as a team with all possible outcomes and factors taken into account to ensure the best possible outcomes for patients. However, research has shown that in South Africa (SA), the multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach is not generally used when making decisions around feeding.
Objectives. To explore the clinical decision-making (CDM) factors in feeding practices in adults of the MDT in public healthcare intensive care units (ICUs) in Johannesburg, SA.
Method. A qualitative design with non-probability purposive sampling was used. There were 15 MDT participants across two tertiary hospitals. Data were derived from observations, focus groups, and individual interviews and analysed using a reflective thematic approach.
Results. Three themes were reported on, namely decision-making factors in the ICU by the MDT, non-patient-related factors and the meaning and misconception of the word ‘tolerance’. There are no protocols followed in the ICU and decisions are made on an individual basis. Non-patient- related factors impact the decisions and when the MDT collaborates, it positively influences the CDM process. Different MDT members use the word ‘tolerance’ differently in dysphagia, which needs to be considered.
Conclusion. Clinical factors were the primary consideration for all MDT members when selecting a feeding method for critically ill patients. Environmental factors were also considered when adaptations were necessary owing to contextual constraints. The findings indicate that a multidisciplinary approach to feeding is not consistently practised in SA public sector ICUs, and there is no standardised feeding protocol in place. This was evident from the infrequent communication and collaboration among MDT members. Improved interdisciplinary co-ordination is needed. Additionally, inconsistent use of medical terminology among team members may affect patient care. Clear communication of terminology is essential to ensure mutual understanding of clinical decisions.
Article Details
Issue
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The SAJCC is published under an Attribution-Non Commercial International Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC 4.0) License. Under this license, authors agree to make articles available to users, without permission or fees, for any lawful, non-commercial purpose. Users may read, copy, or re-use published content as long as the author and original place of publication are properly cited.
Exceptions to this license model is allowed for UKRI and research funded by organisations requiring that research be published open-access without embargo, under a CC-BY licence. As per the journals archiving policy, authors are permitted to self-archive the author-accepted manuscript (AAM) in a repository.
How to Cite
References
1. Zuercher P, Moret CS, Dziewas R, Schefold JC. Dysphagia in the intensive care unit: Epidemiology, mechanisms, and clinical management. Crit Care 2019;23(1):103. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054- 019-2400-2
2. Brodsky MB, Pandian V, Needham DM. Post-extubation dysphagia: A problem needing multidisciplinary efforts. Intensive Care Med 2020;46(1):93–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134- 019-05865-x
3. Brodsky MB, Mayfield EB, Gross RD. Clinical decision making in the ICU: Dysphagia screening, assessment, and treatment. Semin Speech Lang 2019;40(3):170–187. https://doi. org/10.1055/s-0039-1688980
4. Ntoumenopoulos G. Rehabilitation during mechanical ventilation: Review of the recent literature. Intensive Crit Care Nurs 2015;31(3):125–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iccn.2015.02.001
5. Curci C, Pisano F, Bonacci E, et al. Early rehabilitation in post-acute COVID-19 patients: Data from an Italian COVID-19 rehabilitation unit and proposal of a treatment protocol. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2020;56(5):633–641. https://doi.org/10.23736/S1973-9087.20.06339-X
6. McRae J, Montgomery E. Garstang Z, Cleary E. The role of speech and language therapists in the intensive care unit. J Intensive Care Soc 2020;21(4):344-348. https://doi. org/10.1177/1751143719875687
7. Bendavid I, Singer P, Theill M, et al. NutritionDay ICU: A 7 year worldwide prevalence study of nutrition practice in intensive care. Clin Nutr 2017;36(4):1122–1129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. clnu.2016.07.012
8. Prohask CC, Sottile PD, Nordon-Craft A, et al. Patterns of utilisation and effects of hospital- specific factors on physical, occupational, and speech therapy for critically ill patients with acute respiratory failure in the USA: Results of a 5-year sample. Crit Care 2019;23(1):1–8. https://doi. org/10.1186/S13054-019-2467-9/TABLES/3
9. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 2006;3(2):77–101.
https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
10. Campbell KA, Orr E, Durepos P,. et al. Reflexive thematic analysis for applied qualitative health research. Qual Rep 2021;26(6):2011–2028. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2021.5010
11. Tatsumi H. Enteral tolerance in critically ill patients. J Intensive Care 2019;7(1):30. https://doi. org/10.1186/s40560-019-0378-0
12. Coutts K, Pillay M. Decision making and the bedside assessment: The speech language therapists’ thinking when making a diagnosis at the bed. S Afr J Commun Disord 2021;68(1):e1-e8. https:// doi.org/10.4102/SAJCD.V68I1.790
13. Van Bewer V. Transdisciplinarity in health care: A concept analysis. Nurs Forum 2017;52(4):339- 347. https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12200
14. Mah JW, Staff II, Fisher SR, Butler KL. Improving decannulation and swallowing function: A comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach to post-tracheostomy care. Respir Care 2017;62(2):137-143. https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.04878
15. Perren A, Zürcher P, Schefold JC. Clinical approaches to assess post-extubation dysphagia (PED) in the critically ill. 2019;34:475-486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-019-09977-w
16. Leder S, Warner HL, Suiter DM, et al. Evaluation of swallow function post-extubation: Is it necessary to wait 24 hours? Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2019;128(7):619-624. https://doi. org/10.1177/0003489419836115
17. Kozlowski D, Hutchinson M, Hurley J, Rowley J, Sutherland J. The role of emotion in clinical decision making: An integrative literature review. BMC Med Educ 2017;17(1):255. https://doi. org/10.1186/s12909-017-1089-7
18. Naidoo R, Naidoo K. Prioritising ‘already-scarce’ intensive care unit resources in the midst of COVID-19: A call for regional triage committees in South Africa. BMC Med Ethics 2021;22(1):28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00596-5
19. Maphumulo WT, Bhengu BR. Challenges of quality improvement in the healthcare of South Africa post-apartheid: A critical review. Curationis 2019;42(1):e1–e9. https://doi.org/10.4102/ curationis.v42i1.1901
20. Malakoane B, Heunis JC, Chikobvu P, Kigozi NG, Kruger WH. Public health system challenges in the Free State, South Africa: A situation appraisal to inform health system strengthening. BMC Health Serv Res 2020;20(1):58. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4862-y
21. Chen DE, Goh SW, Chan HN, et al. K. Rehabilitation of intubated COVID-19 patients in a Singapore regional hospital with early intensive care unit and sustained post-intensive care unit rehabilitation. Proc Singapore Healthc 2022;31:1-7. https://doi.org/10.1177/20101058211035195
22. Arab YM, Reintam Blaser A, Preiser JC. When and how to manage enteral feeding intolerance? Intensive Care Med 2019;45(7):1029–1031. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-019-05635-9
23. Ridley EJ, Parke RL, Davies AR, et al. What happens to nutrition intake in the post-intensive care unit hospitalisation period? An observational cohort study in critically ill adults. J Parenter Enteral Nutr 2019;43(1):88-95. https://doi.org/10.1002/jpen.1196