Three researchers collaborated on the research found in A Survey of Endotracheal Suctioning With Installation Of Normal Saline: Diane Schwenker; Marianne Ferris; Audrey G. Gift.
Qualifications for the three researchers are listed as follows:
Gift (RN, PhD – Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing)
The researchers conducted a survey of five questions related to suctioning. Funding source is not provided, though it is assumed the three nurses incorporated the cost of production and distribution of surveys on their own.
The researchers clearly, simply and at the outset of the article provide their purpose for the research. The stated purpose of the survey research twofold and reads as follows: “The purpose of our study was to determine the extent of use of this procedure among healthcare personnel, especially those who do suctioning often, and to ascertain the perceived benefits and adverse effects of instilling normal saline before suctioning” (Schwenker, Ferris and Gift, 1998, 255). Another purpose of the study is listed as the authors’ objective: “To determine when and how often saline is used during suctioning and to assess the knowledge of nurses and respiratory therapists of the advantages and dangers of using saline during endotracheal suctioning” (Schwenker, et al., 1998, 255).
III. Clinical Problem (Focus) & Significance
The clinical problem addressed is the fact that the instillation of normal saline before suctioning is a nursing practice that commonly occurs, despite little evidence in the literature to support the practice. As Schwenker (et al., 1998) argues, “Instillation of normal saline during suctioning via an endotracheal or a tracheotomy tube is controversial” (255). This creates a clinical problem, since the practice is a commonplace nursing intervention.
The significance of the problem is that use of suctioning and perc...