Use of backrest elevation in critical care: A pilot study

Mary J. Grap, Mary Cantley, Cindy Munro, Mary C. Corley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

43 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

• BACKGROUND Use of lower backrest positions occurs frequently and is a factor in the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia. • OBJECTIVES To determine the usual bed elevation and backrest position in a medical intensive care unit and their relationship to hemodynamic status and enterai feeding. • METHODS Data were collected in a 12-bed medical respiratory intensive care unit for 2 months. A protractor was used to measure the elevation of the head of the bed. Hemodynamic status was defined by systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial blood pressure measurements retrieved from each patient's flow sheet. • RESULTS The sample included 347 measurements of 52 patients. Mean backrest elevation was 22.9°, and 86% of patients were supine. Backrest position differed significantly (P-.005) among nursing shifts (days, evenings, nights) but not for systolic (r=-0.04, P=.49), diastolic (r = 0.01, P = .83), or mean arterial blood pressure (r=-0.01, P=.84). Backrest elevation did not differ significantly between patients who were receiving enteral feedings and patients who were not (P =.23) or between patients receiving intermittent versus continuous nutrition (P =.22). • CONCLUSIONS Use of higher levels of backrest elevation (>30°) is minimal and is not related to use of enterai feeding or to hemodynamic status. The rationale for using lower backrest positions for critically ill patients may be based on convenience, the patient's comfort, or usual patterns in the unit. However, the dangers of supine positioning and its relationship to aspiration and ventilator-associated pneumonia should not be minimized.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)475-480
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican Journal of Critical Care
Volume8
Issue number1
StatePublished - Dec 1 1999
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Critical Care
Arterial Pressure
Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia
Hemodynamics
Intensive Care Units
Respiratory Care Units
Enteral Nutrition
Critical Illness
Nursing

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)
  • Nursing(all)

Cite this

Grap, M. J., Cantley, M., Munro, C., & Corley, M. C. (1999). Use of backrest elevation in critical care: A pilot study. American Journal of Critical Care, 8(1), 475-480.

Use of backrest elevation in critical care : A pilot study. / Grap, Mary J.; Cantley, Mary; Munro, Cindy; Corley, Mary C.

In: American Journal of Critical Care, Vol. 8, No. 1, 01.12.1999, p. 475-480.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Grap, MJ, Cantley, M, Munro, C & Corley, MC 1999, 'Use of backrest elevation in critical care: A pilot study', American Journal of Critical Care, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 475-480.
Grap, Mary J. ; Cantley, Mary ; Munro, Cindy ; Corley, Mary C. / Use of backrest elevation in critical care : A pilot study. In: American Journal of Critical Care. 1999 ; Vol. 8, No. 1. pp. 475-480.
@article{13dcfa712b224fdeb9677d6aeada6bc5,
title = "Use of backrest elevation in critical care: A pilot study",
abstract = "• BACKGROUND Use of lower backrest positions occurs frequently and is a factor in the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia. • OBJECTIVES To determine the usual bed elevation and backrest position in a medical intensive care unit and their relationship to hemodynamic status and enterai feeding. • METHODS Data were collected in a 12-bed medical respiratory intensive care unit for 2 months. A protractor was used to measure the elevation of the head of the bed. Hemodynamic status was defined by systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial blood pressure measurements retrieved from each patient's flow sheet. • RESULTS The sample included 347 measurements of 52 patients. Mean backrest elevation was 22.9°, and 86{\%} of patients were supine. Backrest position differed significantly (P-.005) among nursing shifts (days, evenings, nights) but not for systolic (r=-0.04, P=.49), diastolic (r = 0.01, P = .83), or mean arterial blood pressure (r=-0.01, P=.84). Backrest elevation did not differ significantly between patients who were receiving enteral feedings and patients who were not (P =.23) or between patients receiving intermittent versus continuous nutrition (P =.22). • CONCLUSIONS Use of higher levels of backrest elevation (>30°) is minimal and is not related to use of enterai feeding or to hemodynamic status. The rationale for using lower backrest positions for critically ill patients may be based on convenience, the patient's comfort, or usual patterns in the unit. However, the dangers of supine positioning and its relationship to aspiration and ventilator-associated pneumonia should not be minimized.",
author = "Grap, {Mary J.} and Mary Cantley and Cindy Munro and Corley, {Mary C.}",
year = "1999",
month = "12",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "8",
pages = "475--480",
journal = "American Journal of Critical Care",
issn = "1062-3264",
publisher = "American Association of Critical Care Nurses",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of backrest elevation in critical care

T2 - A pilot study

AU - Grap, Mary J.

AU - Cantley, Mary

AU - Munro, Cindy

AU - Corley, Mary C.

PY - 1999/12/1

Y1 - 1999/12/1

N2 - • BACKGROUND Use of lower backrest positions occurs frequently and is a factor in the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia. • OBJECTIVES To determine the usual bed elevation and backrest position in a medical intensive care unit and their relationship to hemodynamic status and enterai feeding. • METHODS Data were collected in a 12-bed medical respiratory intensive care unit for 2 months. A protractor was used to measure the elevation of the head of the bed. Hemodynamic status was defined by systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial blood pressure measurements retrieved from each patient's flow sheet. • RESULTS The sample included 347 measurements of 52 patients. Mean backrest elevation was 22.9°, and 86% of patients were supine. Backrest position differed significantly (P-.005) among nursing shifts (days, evenings, nights) but not for systolic (r=-0.04, P=.49), diastolic (r = 0.01, P = .83), or mean arterial blood pressure (r=-0.01, P=.84). Backrest elevation did not differ significantly between patients who were receiving enteral feedings and patients who were not (P =.23) or between patients receiving intermittent versus continuous nutrition (P =.22). • CONCLUSIONS Use of higher levels of backrest elevation (>30°) is minimal and is not related to use of enterai feeding or to hemodynamic status. The rationale for using lower backrest positions for critically ill patients may be based on convenience, the patient's comfort, or usual patterns in the unit. However, the dangers of supine positioning and its relationship to aspiration and ventilator-associated pneumonia should not be minimized.

AB - • BACKGROUND Use of lower backrest positions occurs frequently and is a factor in the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia. • OBJECTIVES To determine the usual bed elevation and backrest position in a medical intensive care unit and their relationship to hemodynamic status and enterai feeding. • METHODS Data were collected in a 12-bed medical respiratory intensive care unit for 2 months. A protractor was used to measure the elevation of the head of the bed. Hemodynamic status was defined by systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial blood pressure measurements retrieved from each patient's flow sheet. • RESULTS The sample included 347 measurements of 52 patients. Mean backrest elevation was 22.9°, and 86% of patients were supine. Backrest position differed significantly (P-.005) among nursing shifts (days, evenings, nights) but not for systolic (r=-0.04, P=.49), diastolic (r = 0.01, P = .83), or mean arterial blood pressure (r=-0.01, P=.84). Backrest elevation did not differ significantly between patients who were receiving enteral feedings and patients who were not (P =.23) or between patients receiving intermittent versus continuous nutrition (P =.22). • CONCLUSIONS Use of higher levels of backrest elevation (>30°) is minimal and is not related to use of enterai feeding or to hemodynamic status. The rationale for using lower backrest positions for critically ill patients may be based on convenience, the patient's comfort, or usual patterns in the unit. However, the dangers of supine positioning and its relationship to aspiration and ventilator-associated pneumonia should not be minimized.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032603358&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032603358&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 9987545

AN - SCOPUS:0032603358

VL - 8

SP - 475

EP - 480

JO - American Journal of Critical Care

JF - American Journal of Critical Care

SN - 1062-3264

IS - 1

ER -