Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-19T03:25:13.006Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does the introduction of a formal neutropenic sepsis protocol improve therapeutic radiographer confidence and competence at recognising sepsis within the radiotherapy department?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 October 2021

Adam Clayton Open the ORCID record for Adam Clayton [Opens in a new window] ,
Siân Griffiths  and
Philippa Gilbert
Adam Clayton
Affiliation:
Radiotherapy and Oncology, Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Combe Park, Bath, UK
Siân Griffiths*
Affiliation:
Radiotherapy and Oncology, Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Combe Park, Bath, UK
Philippa Gilbert
Affiliation:
Advanced Practice, Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Bath, UK
*
Author for correspondence: Siân Griffiths, Radiotherapy and Oncology, Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Combe Park, Bath, BA1 3NG, UK. E-mail: siangriffiths2@nhs.net
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aim:

The aim of this service review was to review whether implementing a formal training package increased therapeutic radiographer confidence and competence in recognising neutropenic sepsis in radiotherapy patients. In addition, authors also investigated whether the introduction of a weekly National Early Warning Score (NEWS) protocol had been successful in identifying cases of neutropenic sepsis.

Material and Methods:

Therapeutic radiographer (n = 13) views on the new protocol were collected through an online questionnaire. A review of the clinical observation sheets of patients who received chemo-radiotherapy (n = 49) between 18 April 2019 and 31 October 2019 was undertaken. Information on disease site, NEWS scores, number of patients who had become neutropenic and action taken by therapeutic radiographers was collected.

Results:

The majority of respondents to the questionnaire found that training benefitted both professionals and patients. Some challenges were highlighted relating to increased workload. For patients receiving regular observations, NEWS scores ranged from 0 to 4. When a patient scored on NEWS, the most common score was 1 across all treatment sites except cervix.

Findings:

Implementing a neutropenic sepsis protocol appears to be beneficial to therapeutic radiographers as professionals, increasing their confidence in patient assessment and monitoring. Regular observations may help to identify deteriorating patients alongside clinical judgement and symptom reviews.

Keywords

Radiotherapyneutropenic sepsispatient observations
Type
Original Article
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 22 , 2023 , e15
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Neutropenic Sepsis: Prevention and Management in People with Cancer. [Online]. 2012. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg151/chapter/Introduction#managing-suspected-neutropenic-sepsis-in-secondary-and-tertiary-care-2. Accessed 17th February 2020.Google Scholar
National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death. Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapy: For Better, for Worse? [Online]. 2008. https://www.ncepod.org.uk/2008sact.html. Accessed 17th February 2020.Google Scholar
Vanckavičienė, A, Macijauskienė, J, Blaževičienė, A, Basevičius, A, Andersson, B. Assessment of radiographers’ competences from the perspectives of radiographers and radiologists: a cross-sectional survey in Lithuania. BMC Med Educ 2017; 17: 1.Google ScholarPubMed
Andersson, B, Fridlund, B, Elgán, C, Axelsson, Å. Radiographers’ areas of professional competence related to good nursing care. Scand J Caring Sci 2008; 22 (3): 401–409.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Snaith, B, Lancaster, A. Clinical history and physical examination skills – a requirement for radiographers? Radiography 2008; 14 (2): 150–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sahlqvist, S, Song, Y, Bull, F, Adams, E, Preston, J, Ogilvie, D. Effect of questionnaire length, personalisation and reminder type on response rate to a complex postal survey: randomised controlled trial. BMC Med Res Methodol 2011; 11 (1): 62–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelley, K. Good practice in the conduct and reporting of survey research. Int J Qual Health C 2003; 15 (3): 261–266.Google ScholarPubMed
Polgar, S, Thomas, S. Introduction to Research in the Health Sciences, 4 th edition. Elsevier Churchill Livingstone: London, 2000.Google Scholar
Whiting, L. Analysis of phenomenological data: personal reflections on Giorgi’s method. Nurse Res 2001; 9 (2): 60–74.Google ScholarPubMed
Bate, J, Gibson, F, Johnson, E, Selwood, K, Skinner, R, Chisholm, J. Neutropenic sepsis: prevention and management of neutropenic sepsis in cancer patients (NICE Clinical Guideline CG151). Arch Dis Child 2020; 98 (2): 73–75.Google Scholar
The Society and College of Radiographers. Code of Professional Conduct. [Online]. 2013. https://www.sor.org/learning/document-library/code-professional-conduct. Accessed 30 September 2020.Google Scholar
Moran, S, Warren-Forward, H. Development of a training package to increase the performance of radiographers in assessing screening mammograms. Radiographer 2011; 58 (2): 10–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The Health and Care Professions Council. ‘Standards of Continuing Professional Development’ [Online] 2020. Available at: https://www.hcpc-uk.org/standards/standards-of-continuing-professional-development/. Accessed 24 August 2020.Google Scholar
McEvoy, N, Patton, D, Walsh, S, O’Connor, T, Moore, Z, Nugent, L. What is the effect of frequent basic life support refresher sessions on health care professionals’ retention of cardiopulmonary resuscitation skills? A systematic review. J Educ Pract 2018; 9 (29): 22–31.Google Scholar
Nazarko, L. ‘How to Read the NEWS: The New Early Warning System’. [Online]. 2020. https://www.independentnurse.co.uk/professional-article/how-to-read-the-news-the-new-early-warning-system/218551/. Accessed 29 September 2020.Google Scholar
Patel, R, Nugawela, M, Edwards, H, Richards, A, Le Roux, H, Pullyblank, A, Whiting, P. Can early warning scores identify deteriorating patients in pre-hospital settings? A systematic review. Resuscitation 2018; 132: 101–111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lyman, G, Lyman, C, Agboola, O. Risk models for predicting chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. Oncologist 2005; 10 (6): 427–437.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilkinson, E. UK NHS staff: stressed, exhausted, burnt out. Lancet 2005; 385 (9971): 841–842.Google Scholar
Fisher, R, Croxson, C, Ashdown, H, Hobbs, F. GP views on strategies to cope with increasing workload: a qualitative interview study. Brit J Gen Pract 2017; 67 (655): e148–e156.Google ScholarPubMed
Handley, N, Schuchter, L, Bekelman, J. Best practices for reducing unplanned acute care for patients with cancer. J Oncol Pract 2018; 14 (5): 306–313.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Royal College of Physicians. National Early Warning Score (NEWS) 2. 2017. https://www.rcplondon.ac.uk/projects/outputs/national-early-warning-score-news-2.Google Scholar