Investigation and Analysis of the Current Status of Rationality and Standardization of Oxygen Therapy in Hospitalized Adult Patients

1Citations
Citations of this article
11Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the rationality and standardization of oxygen therapy for hospitalized adult patients, so as to provide a basis for improving the quality of oxygen therapy care. Methods: Self-designed “Inpatient Oxygen Therapy Status Questionnaire”, using a cross-sectional survey, surveyed 185 oxygen inhalation patients in a tertiary general hospital from August 3–15, 2020, based on the formulation and promulgation of the Chinese Nursing Association The “Nursing care for adult patient with oxygen therapy” standard evaluates the rationality of clinical oxygen therapy implementation and the standardization of nursing measures. Results: The reasonable rate of oxygen therapy for hospitalized adult patients was 19.46%, and the standardized rate of nursing measures was 54.52%. The reasonable and standardized rates of medical wards were higher than those of surgical and specialized wards, and were statistically significant (P<0.05). The incidence of complications of oxygen therapy was positively correlated with the rationality of oxygen therapy and the standardized data of nursing measures. Conclusion: The clinical oxygen therapy nursing practice and the standard of “Nursing care for adult patient with oxygen therapy” are quite inadequate. There are differences in the quality of oxygen therapy in different wards. Nursing managers should strengthen training and management, standardize nursing behaviors, and improve the quality of oxygen therapy and ensure oxygen therapy for patients’ safety.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wang, J., Zhou, L., Liu, K., Dou, L., Wang, R., & Chen, B. (2023). Investigation and Analysis of the Current Status of Rationality and Standardization of Oxygen Therapy in Hospitalized Adult Patients. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 16, 1915–1926. https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S404595

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free