Virtual Library
Start Your Search
P. Fulbrok
Author of
-
+
P2.07 - Poster Session with Presenters Present (ID 468)
- Event: WCLC 2016
- Type: Poster Presenters Present
- Track: Nurses
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:
- Coordinates: 12/06/2016, 14:30 - 15:45, Hall B (Poster Area)
-
+
P2.07-005 - Narratives from High Risk Respiratory Patients Who Had Bronchoscopy with Limited Sedation and Analgesia (ID 3733)
14:30 - 14:30 | Author(s): P. Fulbrok
- Abstract
Background:
Bronchoscopy is a standard procedure to investigate and treat respiratory pathology. When patients have high risk respiratory conditions e.g. chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, the administration of sedation and analgesia is often restricted to help prevent respiratory complications. In this study, limited sedation and analgesia was given up to maximum doses of midazolam 5mg and fentanyl 100mcg. Prior to this study, the patient experience of bronchoscopy with limited sedation and analgesia was relatively unexplored. The aim of this study was to explore the patient experience of bronchoscopy with limited sedation and analgesia.
Methods:
A qualitative, interpretive approach was used to collect data, analyse and write up the stories of the 13 participants in the study. Data were collected using unstructured interviews. These were transcribed then analysed phenomenologically (after Van Manen, 1990).
Results:
Bob was scared that he had lung cancer and required a bronchoscopy with biopsy to determine this. During the procedure Bob was aware and heard the doctors say they could not do a biopsy. This made Bob angry and frustrated. John was also aware during his bronchoscopy and remembered coughing and choking during the procedure. John described choking as the worst feeling. Rachel was fearful that the bronchoscopy procedure would be uncomfortable and anticipated throat discomfort with coughing. Rachel expressed feeling unprepared before the procedure resulting in heightened anxiety. She also said the humour of the hospital workers helped relieve her anxiety pre-procedure. Rachel was not aware during her procedure, but suffered a sore throat and aggravation of her asthma post procedure.
Conclusion:
Patients’ experiences of fear dominated the findings. For example, coughing and choking during the procedure may potentially lead to fears that they are impeding the diagnostic process. The fear that they may have lung cancer may elevate levels of anxiety and possibly impact other emotional responses, recollection of instructions and patient education. Fear of the procedure can be reduced with caring and supportive healthcare workers. It is proposed that effective communication may promote appropriate education, support and reduce unrealistic expectations, and ease patient fears. Helpful educational material could include patient experiences of the procedure plus their acceptance of negative experiences in order to obtain a medical diagnosis. Ultimately, improved pharmaceutical interventions and anaesthetic support to improve patient experiences and manage post-procedural problems may be beneficial.
