Can nurses safely assess the need for endotracheal suction in short-term ventilated patients, instead of using routine techniques?

Abstract

Most literature describes endotracheal suction as a hazardous procedure associated with numerous complications and proposes that it should only be performed as necessary to minimize these complications. Other authors suggest endotracheal suction only after assessment predisposes patients to a number of different complications. This article describes a controlled study to compare and contrast the differences in endotracheal suction outcomes in patients who received ritualized 2 hourly suctioning and those who received it following assessment. A group of qualified nurses in an Intensive Care Unit were taught auscultation skills to assess a patient's needs for suctioning and all the nurses received educational training regarding endotracheal suctioning. Short-term ventilated patients were allocated to receive endotracheal suctioning either when the need for it was determined by assessment only or routinely, using a standardized suctioning technique. The results demonstrated a clear increase in nurses' knowledge regarding endotracheal suctioning. The assessed group of patients demonstrated significantly better outcomes and less complications than the controlled group in relation to changes in peak airway pressures, heart rate and mean arterial pressure pre- and post-endotracheal suctioning, and the amount of secretions obtained on suctioning. Although only preliminary, these results do provide support for the view that endotracheal suction only in response to assessment is better practice for short-term ventilated patients.