• Find People
  • Campus Map
  • PiratePort
  • A-Z
    • About
    • Submit
    • Browse
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   ScholarShip Home
    • Division of Health Sciences
    • College of Nursing
    • View Item
    •   ScholarShip Home
    • Division of Health Sciences
    • College of Nursing
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of The ScholarShipCommunities & CollectionsDateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsTypeDate SubmittedThis CollectionDateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsTypeDate Submitted

    My Account

    Login

    Statistics

    View Google Analytics Statistics

    Perceptions of Qualitative Versus Quantitative Monitoring for the Assessment of Postoperative Residual Neuromuscular Blockade Among CRNAs: A Quality Improvement Project

    Thumbnail
    View/ Open
    DNP Project Paper (1.242Mb)
    poster (515.2Kb)

    Show full item record
    Author
    Bolick, Andrew
    Abstract
    There are two categories of monitoring neuromuscular blockade: qualitative and quantitative. There is no defined method supported by the AANA, creating the potential for misdiagnosis and misinterpretation of residual neuromuscular blockade (rNMB) and potential patient outcomes. The purpose of this quality improvement project was to assess anesthesia providers' perceptions of the usefulness of and preference for qualitative peripheral-nerve-stimulator (PNS) versus quantitative acceleromyography (ACM) neuromuscular blockade reversal measurements in the perioperative setting of a level one trauma center located in the eastern United States. The intervention consisted of an educational video slideshow demonstrating how to operate and interpret quantitative assessment of neuromuscular blockade. Pre- and post-intervention surveys were used to gather data. A review of pre-intervention data showed that participants did not routinely utilize quantitative methodology despite having had a patient experience rNMB. Post-intervention data showed increased utilization and increased likelihood of future use of ACM. Standardizing monitoring of neuromuscular blockade monitoring with quantitative methodology has the potential to reduce incidence of residual neuromuscular blockade, which is linked to poor patient outcomes, prolonged hospitalization, and increased patient costs.
    Description
    None
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10342/11799
    Subject
     CRNA; Acceleromyography; Residual neuromuscular blockade 
    Date
    2022-11-23
    Citation:
    APA:
    Bolick, Andrew. (November 2022). Perceptions of Qualitative Versus Quantitative Monitoring for the Assessment of Postoperative Residual Neuromuscular Blockade Among CRNAs: A Quality Improvement Project (DNP Scholarly Project, East Carolina University). Retrieved from the Scholarship. (http://hdl.handle.net/10342/11799.)

    Display/Hide MLA, Chicago and APA citation formats.

    MLA:
    Bolick, Andrew. Perceptions of Qualitative Versus Quantitative Monitoring for the Assessment of Postoperative Residual Neuromuscular Blockade Among CRNAs: A Quality Improvement Project. DNP Scholarly Project. East Carolina University, November 2022. The Scholarship. http://hdl.handle.net/10342/11799. February 06, 2023.
    Chicago:
    Bolick, Andrew, “Perceptions of Qualitative Versus Quantitative Monitoring for the Assessment of Postoperative Residual Neuromuscular Blockade Among CRNAs: A Quality Improvement Project” (DNP Scholarly Project., East Carolina University, November 2022).
    AMA:
    Bolick, Andrew. Perceptions of Qualitative Versus Quantitative Monitoring for the Assessment of Postoperative Residual Neuromuscular Blockade Among CRNAs: A Quality Improvement Project [DNP Scholarly Project]. Greenville, NC: East Carolina University; November 2022.
    Collections
    • College of Nursing

    xmlui.ArtifactBrowser.ItemViewer.elsevier_entitlement

    East Carolina University has created ScholarShip, a digital archive for the scholarly output of the ECU community.

    • About
    • Contact Us
    • Send Feedback