การพัฒนาและประเมินผล 6 แผนการพยาบาลสำหรับผู้ป่วยภาวะติดเชื้อใน      กระแสเลือด ในหอผู้ป่วยใน โรงพยาบาลวัฒนานคร

Hansa  Nilpromma

Authors

Hansa Nilpromma -

Keywords:

Sepsis, Nursing care plans, Clinical outcomes, Satisfaction, Evidence-based nursing practice

Abstract

This study aimed to develop and evaluate the implementation of the “6 Nursing Care Plans” for sepsis patients, comprising: screening and monitoring, infection control, circulatory support, respiratory support, nutritional support, and complication prevention, by assessing the nursing process, clinical outcomes, and satisfaction. A quasi-experimental study using a two-group post-test design was conducted in two phases: development of nursing care plans based on evidence-based practice and the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines, and evaluation of their effectiveness. Forty sepsis patients were recruited by purposive sampling and allocated into a control group (n = 20, receiving standard care) and an experimental group (n = 20, receiving the 6 nursing care plans) using sequential allocation. The nursing care plans were validated for content validity and assessed for quality using the AGREE II instrument. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, independent t-test, and Fisher’s exact test.

Results: Baseline characteristics were not significantly different between the two groups, except for qSOFA scores, which were significantly higher in the control group (1.70 ± 0.57 vs. 1.20 ± 0.52; p = .006). The experimental group demonstrated significantly higher nursing care plan adherence scores (38.05 ± 0.22 vs. 27.10 ± 3.54; p < .001). Regarding clinical outcomes, the experimental group showed a positive trend with a shorter average length of stay (5.25 ± 4.22 vs. 6.90 ± 4.33 days; p = .214) and no 28-day mortality (0%), while the control group had a mortality rate of 5.0% (p = 1.000). Although neither outcome reached statistical significance, both reflected a clear positive clinical trend. Furthermore, satisfaction was rated at the highest level by both registered nurses and patients’ relatives (4.70 ± 0.31 and 4.75 ± 0.43, respectively).

References

World Health Organization.(2020). Global report on the epidemiology and burden of sepsis: current evidence, identifying gaps and future directions. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2020.

Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, Shankar-Hari M, Annane D, Bauer M, et al.(2016). The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315(8):801–10.

Rhodes A, Evans LE, Alhazzani W, Levy MM, Antonelli M, Ferrer R, et al.(2016). Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock: 2016. Intensive Care Med. 2017;43(3):304–77.

Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, Annane D, Gerlach H, Opal SM, et al.(2013). Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012. Intensive Care Med. 2013;39(2):165–228.

สถาบันวิจัยระบบสาธารณสุข.(2565). สถานการณ์โรคติดเชื้อในกระแสเลือดในประเทศไทย. นนทบุรี: สถาบันวิจัยระบบสาธารณสุข; 2565.

Wanlumkhao W, Rattanamongkolgul D, Ekpanyaskul C.(2525). Performance of early sepsis screening tools for timely diagnosis and antibiotic stewardship in a resource-limited Thai community hospital. Antibiotics (Basel). 2025;14(7):708.

Schultz MJ, Dunser MW, Dondorp AM, Adhikari NKJ, Iyer S, Kwizera A, et al.(2017). Current challenges in the management of sepsis in ICUs in resource-poor settings and suggestions for the future. Intensive Care Med. 2017;43(5):612–24.

Kleinpell R, Aitken L, Schorr CA.(2013). Implications of the new international sepsis guidelines for nursing care. Am J Crit Care. 2013;22(3):212–22.

Wanlumkhao W, Rattanamongkolgul D, Ekpanyaskul C.(2025). Performance of early sepsis screening tools for timely diagnosis and antibiotic stewardship in a resource-limited Thai community hospital. Antibiotics (Basel). 2025;14(7):708.

Liu CX, Wang XL, Zhang K, Zhao XD, Zhu JY, Mao EQ, et al.(2021). Study on clinical nursing pathway to promote the effective implementation of sepsis bundle in septic shock. Eur J Med Res. 2021;26(1):69.

โรงพยาบาลวัฒนานคร.(2567). รายงานสถิติผู้ป่วยภาวะติดเชื้อในกระแสเลือด หอผู้ป่วยใน โรงพยาบาลวัฒนานคร ปี พ.ศ. 2565–2567. สระแก้ว: โรงพยาบาลวัฒนานคร; 2567.

Kumar A, Roberts D, Wood KE, Light B, Parrillo JE, Sharma S, et al.(2011). Duration of hypotension before initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2011;39(6):1294–303.

Seymour CW, Liu VX, Iwashyna TJ, Brunkhorst FM, Rea TD, Scherag A, et al.(2016). Assessment of clinical criteria for sepsis: for the third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315(8):762–74.

Jiunnot R.(2024). Development of a nursing care model for patients with sepsis in the emergency and forensic department, Bandanlanhoi Hospital, Sukhothai Province. Northern Science and Technology Journal. 2024;5(2):50–65.

Kosasang N.(2023). Development of a care model for patients with sepsis and documentation using the IPD Paperless program in the inpatient department, Bueng Khong Long Hospital, Bueng Kan Province [research report]. Bueng Kan: Bueng Kan Provincial Public Health Office; 2023.

Kiatmannarojn A.(2020). Development of a care model for patients with sepsis at Wapi Pathum Hospital. J Acad Mahasarakham Prov Health Off. 2020;5(9):24–42.

Kleinpell R, Ferraro DM, Maves RC, Balch J, Srinivasan L, Posa P, et al.(2022). Surviving Sepsis Campaign: Research Priorities for Nurse and Non-Physician Clinicians. Crit Care Med. 2022;50(2):e191–201.

Chayarut P, Tospitakkul S.(2017). Effectiveness of a nursing care model for patients with sepsis. J Nurs Health Care. 2017;35(3):224–31.

Liu X, Zhang Y, Liu Z, Wang J.(2021). Effect of a clinical nursing pathway on patient outcomes and satisfaction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Nurs Stud. 2021;120:103985.